A well-substantiated report is as vital to science as is a well-designed study

Abstract

Sir, I read with interest the Journal of Pharmacy and Bioallied Sciences conference supplement article of Pillai et al.[1] (Volume 5 | Issue 6 [Supplement]) as conference proceedings on behalf of “Indian academy of dental specialists.” The methods were quite intriguing and well-designed and the results were of scientific merit. Nevertheless, the report was poorly written and also bordering on accidental plagiarism. Many sentences in the introduction and discussion lacked references. Such statements had been reported previously in various articles (including but not limited to these four).[2345] Such papers deserved to be cited when their contents were used. This might have occurred not by any intention, but probably since it was originally a conference presentation, and that the authors might have paid less attention to the drafted report. Moreover, stating a scientific claim without substantiating it using proper references renders the statement unreliable. Scientists should use validated material in their reports. If there are no relevant references, they should allude that the assertion is their own deduction, not a scientific finding. Unsubstantiated scientific allegations might blur the distinct lines between scientific facts / theories and unproven ideas / theorems. A sound, well-discussed report might be as necessary as a proper research design, if not more important. A high-quality original study needs a good deal of interpretation and discussion, something almost missing in this paper (again perhaps since it was a conference presentation). Even some sentences are repeated throughout the text. These issues might compromise the originality of the content, despite the fact that the methods and results were genuine. This properly designed study could seem more valuable with a better article.

Ähnliche Arbeiten