Cases

Showing 76–100 of 586 results.

All the cases COPE has discussed since 1997 are here in a searchable database. We have over 500 cases, with the advice given by the COPE Forum (COPE members) or by COPE Council (designated with a “C” case number) and, for some cases, 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 or by filtering your inquiry by core practice. The COPE Case Taxonomy gives more detail of COPE's classifications and keywords. 

We encourage members to look at the database before submitting a case to the Forum or to COPE Council to see if similar cases have already been discussed. Please note that advice is specific to the particular case under consideration and may not necessarily be applicable to similar cases either past or future.

The cases are brought by COPE members to the Forum (or to Council) and are discussed between all the participants of the Forum (or members of the Council). The notes in each case reflect the discussion that took place. The advice from the Forum participants (or from Council) is provided back to the member who brought the case, but the final decision on handling the case lies with the member editor and/or publisher.

Disclaimer:
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. Fraud or sloppiness in a submitted manuscript
    Audio

  2. A case with no independent institution to investigate
    Audio

  3. Possible breach of reviewer confidentiality
    Audio

  4. Image manipulation as a general practice

  5. Coauthor fails to respond to request to confirm coauthorship

  6. Potential fabrication of data in primary studies included in a meta-analysis accepted for publication

  7. Online posting of confidential draft by peer reviewer

  8. Identifying patient information published in a figure

  9. Claim of plagiarism in published article

  10. Misattributed authorship and unauthorized use of data

  11. Two reviewer reports contain a significant amount of verbatim textual overlap

    Case number: 
    13-16
    Year: 
    2013
    Resolution: 
    On-going
  12. Ethical concerns about a study involving human subjects

  13. A case of plagiarism?

  14. Omitted author

  15. A case of salami slicing

  16. Authorship dispute

  17. Retraction update?

  18. Unusually frequent submission of articles by a single author

  19. New claim to authorship of published paper

  20. Ethical obligation to find reviewers

    Case number: 
    13-06
    Year: 
    2013
    Resolution: 
    Case Closed
  21. Editor as author of a paper

  22. Findings of a published trial called into question by a subsequent audit of trial conduct

  23. Ethical concerns and the validity of documentation supplied by the authors

  24. Change in author’s name after publication

    Case number: 
    13-02
    Year: 
    2013
    Resolution: 
    Case Closed
  25. Paper submitted for publication without consent or knowledge of co-authors

Pages