Two articles published in 2006 and 2008 (by different author groups) had image integrity concerns that have been raised to the publisher. The journal verified independently that these image duplication concerns are valid and reached out to the corresponding authors first and upon not receiving a response subsequently sent emails to all authors multiple times.
But due to the age of the paper it has been difficult to contact the authors. In one case the journal was finally able to contact the now retired author, and they are willing to submit an author correction. For the other article where we cannot get in touch with any author the journal is considering publishing an expression of concern. However, since the articles were published the journal has been absorbed into a new journal from the same publisher. Any changes must therefore be made manually and may not get updated in PubMed Central.
Questions for the Forum:
- Should the corrective measures be published under the original journal title (updating the table of contents for the last issue) or in the new journal which took in the older journal and its published content?
- Is it acceptable to publish an expression of concern knowing that it may never be updated for an older article and the issues with the publication will remain?
- How should a journal handle image integrity concerns for an older high impact article when the science has progressed and a correction or expression of concern may not be as effective?
- Is there a period of time after which it may no longer be possible to adequately follow due process of contacting authors given some may have retired or passed away? How best as a scholarly community can we approach potential concerns in papers that may now be 20+ years since they were published?
It is important to take some action no matter how old an article is in order to preserve the integrity of the published record and alert readers that a concern has been raised. However, the editors should satisfy themselves that the issue is one which needs correcting as opposed to being a natural consequence of advancing scholarship. An expression of concern seems appropriate, and can be a way to signal that it is impossible to make a more definitive judgement while also showing that the journal is doing the right thing. It is often particularly difficult to reach a definite conclusion for image integrity concerns because of the poor quality of older images.
The current journal is the only place available to host such an expression of concern. NISO’s working group on Communication of Retractions, Removals, and Expressions of Concern states that the new publisher takes on responsibility for the content of journals transferred to them and must do the best they can even if they do not have access to full files, metadata, and so on.
The editors may need to contact aggregators and databases separately to inform them of the notice.
The journal plans to proceed with an Expression of Concern under the new title as recommended by the Forum.