Cases

Showing 26–50 of 583 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. Authorship dispute regarding author order

  2. Submission of an already published case report

  3. Suspected unattributed text in a published article

  4. Case histories and post publication debate

  5. Publication of post-doctoral work

  6. Withdrawal of accepted manuscript from predatory journal

  7. Institutional investigation of authorship dispute

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

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

  10. Authorship dispute and possible unreported protocol amendment

  11. Author requests permission to publish review comments

    Case number: 
    16-13
    Year: 
    2016
    Resolution: 
    Case Closed
  12. Author of rejected paper publicly names and criticises peer reviewer

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

  14. The role of the lead author

  15. Parental consent for participants

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

  17. Low risk study with no ethics committee approval

  18. Author requests for certain experts not to be included in the editorial process

  19. Publication of expression of concern

  20. Data anonymity

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

  22. Multiple redundant submissions from the same author

  23. Disclosure and transparency issue

  24. Reviewer concerns about transparency of peer review process

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

Pages