Cases

Showing 126–150 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. Correcting errors versus privileged information

  2. Accusation of non-attribution of authorship

    Case number: 
    12-04
    Year: 
    2012
    Resolution: 
    Case Closed
  3. Submissions from institutions where misconduct has previously been suspected

  4. How to correct an incorrect decision to publish a flawed paper

  5. Habitual plagiarist

    Case number: 
    12-01
    Year: 
    2012
    Resolution: 
    On-going
  6. Reviewer asks trainee to review manuscript

  7. Request to withdraw as an author of an accepted but unpublished paper

  8. Author creates bogus email accounts for proposed reviewers

  9. Publication of private data

  10. Lack of ethical approval and not reporting experimental evidence

  11. Inappropriate authorship on students paper

  12. Possible overlapping publications/data

  13. Transparency of peer review to co-authors

    Case number: 
    11-22
    Year: 
    2011
    Resolution: 
    Case Closed
  14. Duplicate publication in possibly four papers

  15. Duplicate publication allegation

  16. Retraction or correction?

  17. Self-plagiarism of review article

  18. Lost raw data

    Case number: 
    11-19
    Year: 
    2011
    Resolution: 
    Case Closed
  19. Seeking retrospective ethics approval

  20. Disagreement between authors and sponsor

  21. Is this previous publication?

  22. Case of figure duplication and manipulation involving two journals

  23. An enquiry about arbitrating reviewers

    Case number: 
    11-12
    Year: 
    2011
    Resolution: 
    Case Closed
  24. Lack of trial registration leads to new concerns about study conduct and ethical review/approval

  25. Duplicate publication and alleged image manipulation

Pages