提出了一篇论文，其中报告了一群儿童血液疾病治疗的随机对照试验。在治疗组中取得了更好的精神运动发展。本文经历了相当大的修订，由编辑委员会要求，修订版终于提交了一年后。但是修订版现在包括另一个日记中的纸币的新参考。以前没有人知道，基于这项研究还有另一篇论文。提交人被要求解释这一点，他们回答说，“媒体”一词是一个错误：本文才刚刚几周前几周提交给其他期刊。请求此项的副本并正式传真。两篇论文的方法部分中存在很多重叠。观察的结果措施很大程度上不同：提交给期刊的论文看着精神发育，另一个主要用于增长和营养。两者都报告了血液学数据，但这些差别有所不同。 The submitted paper only reported results on the subset of children who were of an appropriate age for developmental tests. There were three concerns: 1. We had not been informed that another paper arising from the same study was being submitted elsewhere. There was no way of deducing this from the covering letter. The other journal did not seem to have been informed that there was a relevant paper submitted elsewhere, at least until the authors were prompted to do this. 2. A paper was referenced as “in press” when it was simply at the stage of having been submitted. 3. There was a good deal of overlap between the two papers. But it would almost certainly have been impracticable to try to report both sets of findings in the same paper, and if they were to be separated, some overlap in the methods sections was inevitable. It could probably have been less if both papers had been submitted to the same journal. Should this matter be taken further?
_作者应该已经发送了另一篇论文的副本，并表示它已在其他地方提交。_这是误导性的声称另一方面是“在按下，”如果刚刚提交考虑。至少第二文件已在修订版中提到。_获得两篇论文的独立评估，以确定重叠水平。_写信给作者突出的作者是什么，即在其他地方宣布提交的“良好做法”，并强调纸质之间的差异，并在新闻中的一个。“
作者对他们所做的事情抱歉，并且在要求时提供了其他信息。很明显，两种不同的部分需要呈现为单独的纸张。作者在最终版本中明确了与其他论文有关的最终版本，并确保了他们在另一篇论文中会这样做的编辑。编辑们满意的是，作者没有故意意图误导期刊。