Cases

Showing 1–25 of 544 results.

All of the cases COPE has discussed since its inception in 1997 have been entered into a searchable database. This database now contains over 500 cases together with the advice given by COPE. For more recent cases, the database also includes follow-up information and about outcome, and podcasts are available for most of the newer cases. We hope this database will provide a valuable resource for editors and those researching publication ethics.

You can search by classification or keyword using either the search field (top left) or by filtering your inquiry using the years and classifications/keywords listed below. A more detailed explanation of the classifications and keywords can be found on the COPE Case Taxonomy page.

We encourage members to look at the database before submitting a case to the Forum to see if similar cases have already been discussed and to see the format used for presenting cases. However, please note that advice from the COPE Forum meetings is specific to the particular case under consideration and may not necessarily be applicable to similar cases either past or future.

COPE accepts no liability for any loss or damage caused or occasioned as a result of advice given by them or by any COPE member. Advice given by COPE and its members is not given for the purposes of court proceedings within any jurisdiction and may not be cited or relied upon for this purpose.

  1. Parental consent for participants

  2. Paper B plagiarised paper A: what to do if a journal does not respond?

  3. Low risk study with no ethics committee approval

  4. Author requests for certain experts, including journal editors, not to be included in editorial process

  5. Publication of expression of concern

  6. Data anonymity

  7. Publication of a manuscript on an external website after acceptance but prior to journal publication

  8. Multiple redundant submissions from the same author

  9. Disclosure and transparency issue

  10. Reviewer concerns about transparency of peer review process

    Case number: 
    16-03
    Year: 
    2016
    Resolution: 
    Case Closed
  11. Attempt to supress legitimate scientific results

  12. Profusion of copied text passages

  13. Inability to contact an author to obtain permission to publish

  14. Requesting authorship after publication

  15. Author impersonating corresponding author without knowledge of coauthors

  16. Handling self-admissions of fraud

  17. Duplicate publication and removal of article

  18. Suspected image manipulation involving four journals

  19. Author disagreement regarding article corrections

    Case number: 
    15-08
    Year: 
    2015
    Resolution: 
    Case Closed
  20. Authorship dispute

  21. Ethics committee approval

    Case number: 
    15-07
    Year: 
    2015
    Resolution: 
    Case Closed
  22. Revoked parental consent

    Case number: 
    15-09
    Year: 
    2015
    Resolution: 
    Case Closed
  23. Reviewer requests to be added as an author after publication

  24. The ethics of self-experimentation

  25. Institution alleges that paper includes fabricated data

Pages