EVALUATION OF ETHICAL IN INSTRUCTIONS TO AUTHORS OF BRAZILIAN SURGICAL JOURNALS

Background: The instructions to authors are the only means of communication between researchers and the editorial standards of a scientific journal. One of the mandatory items to be contained therein is about the ethical part, to prevent new research to carry out abuses with the enrolled on the research are published and stimulated. Aim: To verify the ethical questions on the guidelines of Brazilian surgical journals Method: Thirteen selected journals were divided into two groups: general surgery (n=3), and surgical specialty (n=10). The instructions to authors were analyzed by the quote of ethical requirements based on a specific research protocol, ranging from zero to six points. Results: The average score of the general surgery group was similar than that of the surgical specialty group (3.66±0.57 vs 3.30±1.15, p=0.6154). When each ethical requirement was compared between the groups, there was no significant difference between the ethical requirements (p&lt;0.05). Conclusion: There was respect for most ethical questions evaluated, with no difference between the journals of general or specialty surgery.背景：作者投稿指南是科研人员与科技期刊编辑规范之间唯一的沟通渠道。其中必须包含的强制条目之一为伦理相关内容，旨在防范已发表研究中对研究参与者的滥用行为，并推动合规伦理研究的开展。 目的：评估巴西外科期刊投稿指南中涉及的伦理议题。 方法：选取13种期刊并分为两组：普通外科组（n=3）与外科专科组（n=10）。基于特定研究方案，对各期刊的作者投稿指南中伦理要求相关条目进行评分，评分区间为0至6分。 结果：普通外科组的平均得分与外科专科组无显著差异（3.66±0.57 vs 3.30±1.15，p=0.6154）。对两组间各伦理要求条目进行比较后发现，各伦理要求条目均无显著统计学差异（p<0.05）。 结论：本次评估的绝大多数伦理议题均得到了遵循，普通外科期刊与外科专科期刊之间未表现出显著差异。