Publication of the results is an integral and unavoidable part of any research, as it is the only standardised means by which the results are subject to the scrutiny of scientists with equivalent knowledge. Non-publication of the results of research, or an extended delay in doing so, is considered to be a misuse of the resources employed. This obligation also refers to results that are negative or different from expected.
Although dissemination if scientific spheres (meetings at different levels and publications) is considered to be the final stage of research, the publication of the results constitutes the start of a process with which the scientific community analyses and corrects the results obtained or develops new ones.
The reference to work by third parties should show sufficient recognition of their merit. References to work directly connected to a research project should be included and unjustified references avoided.
The definitive publication of the results should explicitly state:
The institutions or centres to which the authors belong and the institutions or centres in which the research has been possible.
The independent ethical committees which supervised the research protocol, and the authorisations to conduct the research that certain authorities may have granted.
Any financial aid or other type of sponsorship received, both to make the research possible in whole or in part, and if it was intended for any one of the authors, provided the persons or entities involved have not stated their desire to remain anonymous.
All the details of disclosures in conferences or other types of presentation prior to definitive publication, and particularly when the research has involved people or experimentation animals and when financial aid has been received from companies with commercial interests.
Communication and dissemination of research results to the media is unacceptable before publishing in a scientific publication. Advance or premature disclosure or publication of the results may extraordinarily be justified for reasons of public health. In these circumstances, the authors will assess the possibility of the results being reviewed in parallel, by urgent means, in a scientific publication, or they will agree the scope of the extraordinary disclosure with the publishers of the publications in which they had planned definitive publication.
Fragmented publication of a single research project should be avoided. Fragmentation can only be justified for reasons of length. Duplicated or redundant publication is considered an unacceptable practice. Secondary publication is only justified in the terms established in the regulations of the Vancouver group.
In personal or collective assessments of persons which should be considered a section of scientific publications, for purposes of promotion or any type of reward, the parties involved must require that the assessment is always based on the content of the scientific production and not simply the quantity.