Cases

Showing 76–100 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. Coauthor fails to respond to request to confirm coauthorship

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

  3. Online posting of confidential draft by peer reviewer

  4. Identifying patient information published in a figure

  5. Claim of plagiarism in published article

  6. Misattributed authorship and unauthorized use of data

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

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

  9. A case of plagiarism?

  10. Omitted author

  11. A case of salami slicing

  12. Authorship dispute

  13. Retraction update?

  14. Unusually frequent submission of articles by a single author

  15. New claim to authorship of published paper

  16. Ethical obligation to find reviewers

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

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

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

  20. Change in author’s name after publication

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

  22. Journal refuses to correct the record

  23. Inadequate assurance of human research ethics for a questionnaire

  24. Confidentiality breach by an associate editor

  25. Concerns about the reliability of findings following re-analysis of a dataset from a published article

Pages