20

I recently stumbled upon a published article entitled "ANCOVA versus change from baseline had more power in randomized studies and more bias in nonrandomized studies," which has an errata stating the following:

The publisher regrets that in the above-mentioned article the title was changed without the author's approval. The correct title should read:

“ANCOVA versus change from baseline: More power in randomized studies, more bias in nonrandomized studies”

If I am to cite the paper, should I refer to it by its published title (as I did in the reference list below) or by its corrected title?

References

  • Van Breukelen, G.J.P. (2006). ANCOVA versus change from baseline had more power in randomized studies and more bias in nonrandomized studies. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 59(9): 920-925
  • Van Breukelen, G.J.P. (2006). Erratum to “ANCOVA versus change from baseline had more power in randomized studies and more bias in nonrandomized studies”. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 59(12): 1334
  • 7
    I don't understand why the publisher didn't fix the published title and add a note that "The publisher regrets that this article previous appeared under the title 'ANCOVA versus change from baseline had more power in randomized studies and more bias in nonrandomized studies' without the author's approval." – user2768 Sep 26 '18 at 14:27
  • 5
    If the paper has a DOI, the problem is practically insignificant and amounts to a question about formalities. – henning Sep 26 '18 at 14:37
  • 7
    @henning Questions about academic formalities in publication are on topic here. – Alexis Sep 26 '18 at 16:08
  • 5
    @Alexis sure. My comment was more a of hint, saying "don't worry, it's unimportant if you have a DOI". – henning Sep 26 '18 at 16:27
  • 2
    @user2768 Because archival journals consider articles immutable once they have been published online in final form, you have a window where people cited the old title. Also, this is a print journal, so libraries could have received the article with the incorrect title. – user71659 Sep 26 '18 at 17:35
26

In this case I'd use the corrected title, and add make sure to note that the paper is corrected, e.g.

  • Van Breukelen, G.J.P. (2006). ANCOVA versus change from baseline: more power in randomized studies, more bias in nonrandomized studies [corrected]. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 59(9): 920-925

Note that this is also how the paper is listed in Pubmed. I also recommend citing the erratum next to the paper.

4

I'd use the published title, because you're citing a physical document, not a document that hypothetically should have been published. (If a book was printed with the wrong title, then you'd surely cite that title, rather than the title that should have been used.) You could mention that the title wasn't approved by the author, e.g.,

Van Breukelen, G.J.P. (2006). ANCOVA versus change from baseline had more power in randomized studies and more bias in nonrandomized studies. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 59(9): 920-925. (The article was mistakenly published under the aforementioned title, the correct title should be "ANCOVA versus change from baseline: More power in randomized studies, more bias in nonrandomized studies.")

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.