This document discusses the concept of "salami publication" or "salami slicing" which refers to splitting up the results of a single research study into multiple smaller publications. This allows researchers to artificially inflate their publication counts but it is considered questionable and unethical. Key points made include that salami publication misleads readers and reviewers by counting the same data multiple times, distorts the results of meta-analyses, and gives undeserved credit and benefits to authors. While small publishable units can help early career researchers, relying too heavily on this strategy is not looked upon favorably for career advancement. The document also provides recommendations for transparently reporting additional findings from a previously published study.

1. Salami Publication
(Least Publishable Unit)
Winning The Games Researchers Play !

2. Salami Publication
(Least Publishable Unit)

3. Salami Publication
(Least Publishable Unit)
• In Academic Publishing, the least
publishable unit (LPU), also smallest
publishable unit (SPU), minimum
publishable unit (MPU), loot, or publon, is
the smallest measurable quantum of
publication, the minimum amount of
information that can be used to generate a
publication in a peer-reviewed venue, such as
a journal or a conference.

4. Salami Publication
(Least Publishable Unit)

5. Salami Publication
(Least Publishable Unit)
• The term is often used as a joking, ironic, or
derogatory reference to the strategy of
artificially inflating quantity of publications.

6. Salami Publication
(Least Publishable Unit)
• Publication of the results of research is an
essential part of science.
• The number of publications is often used to
assess the work of a scientist and as a basis
for distributing research funds.

7. Salami Publication
(Least Publishable Unit)

8. Salami Publication
(Least Publishable Unit)
• In order to achieve a high rank in such an
assessment, there is a trend to split up
research results into smaller parts that are
published separately, thus inflating the
number of publications.

9. Salami Publication
(Least Publishable Unit)
• This process has been described as splitting
the results into the smallest publishable
units.

10. Salami Publication
(Least Publishable Unit)
• "Salami Publication", sometimes also referred
to as "salami slicing", is a variant of the
smallest-publishable-unit strategy.
• In salami publishing, data gathered by one
research project is separately reported
(wholly or in part) in multiple end
publications.

11. Salami Publication
(Least Publishable Unit)
• Salami Publishing, apparently named by
analogy with the thin slices made from a
larger salami sausage, is generally considered
questionable when not explicitly labelled, as
it may lead to the same data being counted
multiple times as apparently independent
results in aggregate studies.

12. Salami Publication
(Least Publishable Unit)

13. Salami Publication
• When data gathered in one research project
are partially reported as if a single study, a
problem of statistical significance can arise.

14. Salami Publication
• There is no consensus among academics
about whether people should seek to make
their publications least publishable units,
and it has long been resisted by some journal
editors.

15. Salami Publication
(Least Publishable Unit)

16. Salami Publication
(Least Publishable Unit)
• Particularly for people just getting started
in academic publication, writing a few small
papers provides a way of getting used to
how the system of peer review and
professional publication works, and it does
indeed help to boost publication count.

17. Salami Publication
(Least Publishable Unit)

18. Salami Publication
• But publishing too many LPUs is thought
not to impress peers when it comes time to
seek promotion beyond the assistant
professor (or equivalent) level.
• Also, LPUs may not always be the most
efficient way to pass on knowledge, because
they break up ideas into small pieces,
sometimes forcing people to look up many
cross-references.

19. Salami Publication

20. Salami Publication
(Least Publishable Unit)
• Multiple salami slices also occupy more
journal pages than a single synthetic paper
that contains the same information.
• On the other hand, a small piece of
information is easily digestible, and the
reader may not need more information than
what is in the LPU.

21. Salami Publication
(Least Publishable Unit)

22. Salami Publication:
Definitions And Examples
• Salami publication or segmented
publication is a distinct form of redundant
publication which is usually characterized
by similarity of hypothesis, methodology or
results but not text similarity.

23. Salami Publication:
Definitions And Examples
• These aspects of publications are not
objectively detected by software applications
and therefore present a serious threat to
publication ethics.

24. Salami Publication:
Definitions And Examples
• One of the forms of self-plagiarism is
segmented publication, also called “salami
publication”.

25. Salami Publication:
Definitions And Examples
• Even though salami publication was briefly
described in the previous article, recent cases
of questionable publication ethics show that
this type of misconduct is not recognized as
such.

26. Salami Publication:
Definitions And Examples
• Salami publication can be roughly defined as a
publication of two or more articles derived
from a single study.

27. Salami Publication:
Definitions And Examples
• Articles of such type report on data
collected from a single study split into several
segments just large enough to gain
reasonable results and conclusions, also known
as “minimal publishable unit”

28. Salami Publication:
Definitions And Examples
• Most readers will not fail to recognize a true
“textbook” duplicate publication when they
come across one.
• However, it is less likely that two
publications with no obvious text similarity,
each describing different aspects of the same
studied sample, will be considered as serious
misconduct.

29. Salami Publication:
Definitions And Examples

30. Salami Publication:
Definitions And Examples
• From the publication ethics point of view, it
is even worse because it cannot be easily
detected, gives undeserved credit to authors,
misleads the scientific community and
directly influences clinical practice by
distorting medical evidence.

31. Salami Publication:
Definitions And Examples

32. How to detect salami publication?
• There is no software application or
algorithm for detection of salami
publication.
• Identifying this type of publication
misconduct is complex because salami
publications do not often include text
plagiarism so that manuscripts can easily
evade strict software checking.

33. How to detect salami publication?

34. How to detect salami publication?
• Only under the rare circumstances of
encountering both the original and the salami
manuscript can some editors or reviewers
suspect salami publication.

35. How to detect salami publication?
• Even though there are no objective ways to detect
this sort of redundant publication, manuscripts
suspected of being salami publications often report
on identical or similar sample size, hypothesis,
research methodology and results, and very often
have the same authors.

36. Is salami publication always prohibited?
• There are some situations when salami
publication or redundant publication is
allowed.
• Manuscripts based on the same or similar
patient sample can be published in more than
one journal for a different population of
readers, for example from an epidemiologist’s
or clinical chemist’s point of view.

37. Manuscripts based on the same or similar patient
sample can be published in more than one journal for
a different population

38. Is salami publication always prohibited?
• Publication of professional guidelines in two
or more different languages is also not
considered to be salami or duplicate
publication when it is done with the authors’
or publishers’ consent.

39. Is salami publication always prohibited?
• Follow up investigations can be published
using parts of already published results
when the new manuscript largely
contributes new scientific knowledge.
• However, in all such cases, authors are obliged
to provide all necessary information to the
editor in order to evaluate the justification for
publishing such a manuscript.

40. Is salami publication always prohibited?
• Authors must clearly state which of the
presented results are already published and
give the full source and consent of the
original author when applicable.

41. Is salami publication always prohibited?
• The added value of the new manuscript has to
be properly described in the second manuscript
and the extent to which two manuscripts are
similar has to be easily determined.
• Citing the original manuscript solely by
listing it in the reference section is not
enough.

42. Is salami publication always prohibited?
• In case of large epidemiological studies or
randomized controlled trials when a large
amount of data is collected, it is almost
impossible to present all results in a single
manuscript.
• The number of subjects included in the
study can be greater than a few thousands
and longitudinal cohort studies can last for
a few decades.

43. Manuscripts based on the same or similar patient sample can be
published in more than one journal for a different population

44. Is salami publication always prohibited?
• The authors must fully explain which of the
presented information is already published and
why is it relevant to present it again in
different context.

45. Is salami publication always prohibited?
• The final decision to publish such
manuscript is with the journal editor but
the crucial point is the author’s honesty and
transparency.
• During manuscript submission, journals often
ask the authors to confirm the originality of the
submitted manuscript.

46. Is salami publication always prohibited?

47. Is salami publication always prohibited?
• Detection of any kind of misconduct after
completing and submitting the Authors
Statement (includes Authorship Statement,
Statement of Originality, Research Ethics and
Copyright Transfer) can be interpreted as
intentional breach of publication ethics.

48. What is the problem with salami
publication?
• Salami publication is unethical for the reasons
described.
• Authors are often advised to present the data in
the simplest possible way and to focus on simple
hypotheses in order to maintain the attention of
the readers.
• For that reason many authors “simplify” their
findings by splitting the results collected in a
single study into several manuscripts.

49. What is the problem with salami
publication?

50. What is the problem with salami
publication?
• Like any other form of redundant
publication, salami publications artificially
enlarge the number of one author’s
scientific work and therefore give undeserved
benefit to those authors in career
advancement or project funding.

51. What is the problem with salami
publication?
• Greater number of articles can give a better
chance for citations.
• Moreover, such misconduct abuses the
editor’s, reviewer’s and reader’s time and
valuable publishable space at the expense of
another truly original article.
• The ethical issues are numerous, from
dishonesty to copyright violation.

52. What is the problem with salami
publication?

53. What is the problem with salami
publication?
• The most prominent reason for severe
prosecution of salami publication or any
form of duplicate publication is its outright
influence on overall knowledge which is the
basis for clinical decision making, guidelines,
professional recommendations and so on.

54. What is the problem with salami
publication?
• Taking the same data twice into result
calculations can significantly distort the
final outcome of meta-analysis or other
systematic reviews and therefore have a
direct impact on clinical practice.

55. How to avoid salami publication?
• Every research project has to be defined as
clearly as possible from its very beginning.
• All aspects of the research process, from
hypothesis, data collection, researcher’s
assignments and authorship criteria to
manuscript submission have to be planned
in advance.

56. Recommendations for a successful publication
from the research integrity point of view are:
One conducted study should be reported in one article.
A second manuscript based on already published data should:
• properly reference the previously published article;
• besides citing the original article, clearly declare that it is part of
an already published study;
• emphasize all new knowledge added in the second manuscript;
• not repeat any of the data presented in the previous article;
• give a detailed explanation to the journal’s editor on all above
mentioned points because transparency is crucial.
• Never use the same control group for more than one study. Each
control group must be representative to the tested group of a single
study.

57. Recommendations for a successful publication from
the research integrity point of view are:

58. Dealing With Salami Publication
• In case of suspected salami publication, upon
submission of the manuscript, the Journal
editor will contact the author asking for an
explanation.
• If the author’s response is satisfactory, the
editor will decide to proceed with
manuscript processing as long as all the
aforementioned criteria are met.

59. Dealing With Salami Publication
• When the author’s explanation is not
acceptable and there is reasonable doubt
surrounding the author’s good intention or
when there is no answer from the author at all,
the manuscript shall be rejected and either
the co-authors or the authors’ institution
shall be informed.

60. Dealing With Salami Publication
• In case of an already published salami article,
the editor’s decision depends on the amount
and relevance of the duplicated data.
• When there is a minor redundancy, the editor will
contact the author and explain the situation.
• When the author gives a satisfactory and
honest explanation than the editor can consider
publishing a correction article

61. Dealing With Salami Publication
• Corrections have to be made in a way that
properly references the original article and clearly
states all overlaps with the already published data.
• If the amount of overlap is considered
significant and there is no additional scientific
value, than the editor shall contact the author
explaining the need for publishing a statement
of redundant publication or even retracting the
article.

62. Dealing With Salami Publication
• The final decision on acceptable similarity and
the manuscript’s added value to the scientific
knowledge is with the editor.
• A decision shall never be made without
attempting to contact the author and giving
him the chance to make an explanation.

63. Terminology
• Self-Plagiarism
• Self-plagiarism is the use of one's own
previous work in another context without
citing that it was used previously.
• Another form of self-plagiarism is called data
fragmentation or salami slicing.
• This occurs when the author of a study
separates aspects of a study and publishes it
in more than one publication.

64. Self-Plagiarism

65. Self-Plagiarism
• Writers should recycle their own material
carefully and sparingly.
• Self-plagiarism rules are fixed in some areas
and hazy in others.
• The author should avoid using his or her
own work if possible and with discretion if
needed.

66. Self-Plagiarism

67. Duplicate Publication
• Duplicate publication, multiple publication, or
redundant publication refers to publishing the
same intellectual material more than once, by the
author or publisher.
• Multiple submission is not plagiarism, but it is
today often viewed as academic mis-behavior.
• Because it can skew meta-analyses and review
articles and can distort citation indexes and
citation impact by gaming the system to a degree.

68. Duplicate Publication

69. Ingelfinger Rule
• In scientific publishing, Ingelfinger rule
originally stipulated that Journal would not
publish findings that had been published
elsewhere, in other media or in other
journals.
• The rule was subsequently adopted by several
other scientific journals, and has shaped
scientific publishing ever since.

70. Ingelfinger Rule

71. Ingelfinger Rule
• It has also helped to ensure that the
journal's content is fresh and does not
duplicate content previously reported
elsewhere, and seeks to protect the scientific
embargo system.

72. Academic Careerism
• Academic Careerism is the tendency of
academics (professors specifically and
intellectuals generally) to pursue their own
enrichment and self-advancement at the
expense of honest inquiry, unbiased
research and dissemination of truth to their
students and society.

73. Academic Careerism

74. Academic Careerism

75. h-index
• h-index
• The h-index is an author-level metric that
attempts to measure both the productivity and
citation impact of the publications of a
scientist or scholar.
• The index is based on the set of the
scientist's most cited papers and the number
of citations that they have received in other
publications.

76. h-index

77. Impact Factor
• The impact factor (IF) or journal impact factor
(JIF) of an academic journal is a measure
reflecting the yearly average number of citations
to recent articles published in that journal.
• It is frequently used as a proxy for the relative
importance of a journal within its field;
journals with higher impact factors are often
deemed to be more important than those with
lower ones.

78. Impact Factor

79. Impact Factor

80. Peer Review
• Peer review is the evaluation of work by one
or more people with similar competences as
the producers of the work (peers).
• It functions as a form of self-regulation by
qualified members of a profession within
the relevant field. Peer review methods are
used to maintain quality standards, improve
performance, and provide credibility

81. Peer Review

82. Publish Or Perish
• "Publish or perish" is a phrase coined to describe
the pressure in academia to rapidly and
continually publish academic work to sustain or
further one's career.
• Frequent publication is one of the few methods
at scholars' disposal to demonstrate academic
talent. Successful publications bring attention to
scholars and their sponsoring institutions, which
can facilitate continued funding and an
individual's progress through a chosen field.

83. Publish Or Perish

84. Publish Or Perish
• In popular academic perception, scholars who
publish infrequently, or who focus on
activities that do not result in publications,
such as instructing undergraduates, may
lose ground in competition for available
tenure-track positions.

85. Publish Or Perish

86. Publish Or Perish

87. References
• Least Publishable Unit
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Least_publishable_unit
• Pitfalls of Salami Slicing- Focus on Quality, Not Quantity of Publications
https://www.editage.com/insights/the-pitfalls-of-salami-slicing-focus-on-quality-and-not-
quantity-of-publications
• Salami publishing and ethical dilemmas facing editors
http://www.ijaweb.org/article.asp?issn=0019-
5049;year=2017;volume=61;issue=3;spage=269;epage=270;aulast=Parida
• Salami Publication: Definitions And Examples
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3900084/
• Salami publishing and ethical dilemmas facing editors
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5372411/
• The hazards of salami slicing
https://youtu.be/QjVsDAjNwDw
• What is ‘salami-slicing’ and is it acceptable?
https://www.law.hku.hk/researchintegrity/salami-slicing/

88. Thanks…