Showing 276–300 of 582 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. Unusual consent process in a vulnerable population

  2. Author trap/fabrication detection

  3. Controversy regarding ownership of a device

  4. Non-compliance of author with request for information

  5. Signing on behalf of other authors

  6. An appropriate response to concerns of research validity

  7. HIV testing without offering treatment to affected individuals

  8. Studies where there is no research ethics committee, or where committees disagree as to the need for approval

  9. Effect of the British Human Tissue Acts on biological monitoring

  10. Confidentiality and privacy issue

  11. Authorship issue

  12. Plagiarism case

  13. Declaration of contributorship

  14. Lack of patient consent for a case report, patient confidentiality

  15. Duplicate publication?

  16. Competing interest issue

  17. An attempt to publish data already published elsewhere

  18. Definition of plagiarism?

  19. Prolific authors

  20. Suspected financial fraud

  21. Editorial misconduct

  22. No ethics approval or informed consent?

  23. Competing interests question

  24. Ethical approval for a study

  25. Literature evaluation service and supplements