Showing 1–25 of 566 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. Withdrawing from authorship

  2. Editor found guilty of research misconduct

  3. Lead author of a research paper disagrees with content of a linked editorial

  4. Satire in scholarly publishing

  5. Would the loss of a clinical licence in one country impact on the ability to do clinical work in another?

  6. Is it plagiarism to use text verbatim from a manuscript review?

  7. Data manipulation and institute’s internal review

  8. When to conclude correspondence from reader about errors in a published article

  9. Authorship dispute regarding author order

  10. Submission of an already published case report

  11. Suspected unattributed text in a published article

  12. Case histories and post publication debate

  13. Publication of post-doctoral work

    Case number: 
    Case Closed
  14. Withdrawal of accepted manuscript from predatory journal

  15. Institutional investigation of authorship dispute

  16. Author accused of stealing research and publishing under their name

  17. Request by organisation to retract article and publish expression of concern

  18. Authorship dispute and possible unreported protocol amendment

  19. Author requests permission to publish review comments

    Case number: 
    Case Closed
  20. Author of rejected paper publicly names and criticises peer reviewer

  21. What extent of plagiarism demands a retraction vs correction?

  22. The role of the lead author

    Case number: 
    Case Closed
  23. Parental consent for participants

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

  25. Low risk study with no ethics committee approval