A journal published a paper several years ago that subsequently had to be retracted, on the advice of the university where the work had been conducted. The university provided no further details but promised to do so. Two years later they confirmed that the paper should be retracted, but gave no information on exactly what had gone wrong and whether anybody had been punished. Subsequently, one of the authors wrote to the journal expressing concern that no fuller explanation had been offered. He suggested that he was innocent and that one of the authors of the paper was clearly guilty. He said that the retraction did not make clear whether all the authors were equally guilty, and he wanted a retraction published that put this to rights. What should be done next?
_ The problem was clearly between the author and the university and the editor was being asked to intercede on his behalf. _ It was unclear what more the editor could do; he is certainly not in a position to conduct an internal enquiry. _ How much information needs to be obtained before a paper is retracted? _ If an author had been struck off by the General Medical Council (GMC) then a notice should be published. _ See whether all the authors had signed the covering letter on initial submission to the editor. _ Write to the head of the institution, suggesting that an internal enquiry be carried out.
Not all the authors appeared to be equally guilty; one had been referred to the GMC.