Learning Objective #1: Identify the implications of inaccurate references in data-based and other articles in nursing and health care journals

Learning Objective #2: Compare reference error rates for general and clinical nursing journals

---

Problem and Significance: Inaccurate references hinder retrieval of documents, may prevent researchers from examining all of the work by an author, and may result in authors not getting credit for their work. The purpose of this study was to determine the number and types of errors in references in general readership nursing journals: AJN, Nursing Outlook, and RN; neonatal-maternal journals: Neonatal Network, JOGNN, and MCN; critical care journals: Journal of PeriAnesthesia Nursing, American Journal of Critical Care, and Critical Care Nurse; and pediatric nursing journals: Pediatric Nursing, Journal of Pediatric Health Care, and Journal of Pediatric Nursing.

Design, Sample, Procedure: The analysis of reference errors was done using the criteria of Hinchcliff et al. (1993). The error rate was calculated as the percent of references with major and minor errors out of the total number. Six issues of each journal were reviewed, and 10% of the references from all of the articles were randomly selected for analysis. The accuracy of the references (N=785) was checked against the original publication.

Findings and Implications: Reference error rates were: 41.6% in pediatric, 38% in general, 24.4% in neonatal-maternal, and 22.9% in critical care nursing journals. The only journal across these studies with few errors in references was AJN, which had the lowest error rate (9%), likely the result of using an information professional who checks all references of manuscripts accepted for publication. Nurse authors need to check the accuracy of references in manuscripts they are preparing and adopt strategies for avoiding reference errors in papers they write.