Cases

Showing 26–50 of 563 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, we also include follow-up information and outcome. 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.

All of the cases are brought by specific members to the Forum and are discussed between all the participants of the Forum. The notes below reflect the discussion that took place. The advice from the Forum participants is provided back to the member who brought the case to the Forum but the final decision on handling the case lies with the member editor and/or publisher. 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. Publication of a manuscript on an external website after acceptance but prior to journal publication

  2. Multiple redundant submissions from the same author

  3. Disclosure and transparency issue

  4. Reviewer concerns about transparency of peer review process

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

  6. Profusion of copied text passages

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

  8. Requesting authorship after publication

  9. First author submits paper, impersonating corresponding author, without knowledge of co-authors

  10. Handling self-admissions of fraud

  11. Duplicate publication and removal of article

  12. Suspected image manipulation involving four journals

  13. Author disagreement regarding article corrections

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

  15. Ethics committee approval

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

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

  18. The ethics of self-experimentation

  19. Institution alleges that paper includes fabricated data

  20. Plagiarized figure

  21. Author disagreement blocks submission

  22. Possible omission of information essential for conclusions in a research paper

    Case number: 
    14-11
    Year: 
    2014
    Resolution: 
    Case Closed
  23. Possible self-plagiarism and/or prior publication

  24. Institutional review board approval required?

    Case number: 
    14-09
    Year: 
    2014
    Resolution: 
    Case Closed
  25. Institutional review board approval needed?

    Case number: 
    14-08
    Year: 
    2014
    Resolution: 
    Case Closed

Pages