Home

Member Login

Login to COPE

  • Search
  • Advanced Search
  • COPE now has 5405 Members

Home » Annualreport » 1998

1998

  • Download the full text
  • The birth of the Committee on Publication Ethics 1
  • Editorials in The Lancet and the BMJ 3
  • Reseach misconduct: How should editors respond? 6
  • Redundant publication 7
  • Fraud and plagiarism 10
  • Patients' consent for publication of information about them 12
  • The absent critic of misconduct: media interest and professional indifference 15
  • Press Cuttings 18
  • Whistleblowers 24
  • Treatment and prevention: What is COPE and why? 28
  • Free paper session 31
  • COPE diary 33
  • References 63
  • List of delegates 65
Cases: 
The tortuous tale of a paper, a letter and an editorial
The perfect study but no investigational drug
Not getting consent from an ethics committee
Double plagiarism
Suspected fabrication of data
The fraudulent letter
Informed consent
A commentary on a piece of (unethical) research
The reviewer writes comments that he doesn’t want the author to see
False memory syndrome
Attempted redundant publication?
Patient consent and non-consent
Living unrelated (commercial) organ transplant
Disagreement between a reviewer and an author
Should we have had author consent for a randomised controlled trial of a peer review?
Can a scientific paper be published anonymously?

Posted by admin on August 4th 2008

general

  • Homepage
  • About Cope
  • Join COPE
  • Members
  • Links
  • Contact Us

What's New

  • Publication Ethics Blog
  • News & Events
  • Newsletters

Forum

  • Annual Reports
  • Cases
  • Seminars

Resources

  • Audit
  • Code of Conduct
  • Education
  • Flowcharts
  • Guidelines
  • Presentations
  • Research
  • Sample Letters
  • Website Terms and conditions
  • COPE Privacy Policy
  • News Feeds (RSS)