- Case
Plagiarism in a case report
_ This case provoked a great deal of discussion, but it was concluded that the chief executive had conducted a thorough investigation. _ But what was not clear was whether the editors had asked the authors to explain themselves before alerting the chief executive, which COPE feels they should have done. _ There are different cultural understandings of how duplicated material is handled.… - Case
Dubious surgery
A paper was submitted, describing surgery on the sexual organs of four women. The paper was poorly written and hard to follow, but it seems that this surgery was undertaken primarily because of the unsatisfactory sexual experiences of the women’s partners. There was no mention of ethics committee approval or of the women having given consent, not only for the surgery but also for taking part in… - Case
Duplicate publication
…names on the Journal A article, to ask for an explanation. They drew their attention to the COPE guidelines published in Journal B. The authors replied, explaining that the paper published in Journal A reported preliminary findings whereas that published in Journal B reported the final results based on a larger double data set. They admitted that better communication and reciprocal information between… - Case
Dual submission
_ How many other journals had received this paper? _ Perhaps the authors had been naïve and were possibly not serious bona fide authors. _ Send a letter to the authors giving advice on how to submit a paper. _ Refer to the COPE Guidelines on Good Publication Practice and the COPE website.… - Case
Undeclared conflicts of interest and potential author dispute over signed letter for publication
…electronic versions of the journal, but the lead author of the second letter seems to be opposed to this move. The journal plans to override his objections. Does COPE agree with this? A further issue raised by the second letter is that the third party wrote to say that three of the authors of the letter do not support everything that is contained in it. Wouldn’t most people who read a piece that is signed… - Case
Refusal to give details of a competing interest
…the next edition of the journal along with a more detailed study, using evidence gathered during the case and exposing the tobacco company’s action in establishing a secret facility to look at the health effects of passive smoking in a European country. The author in question was the link between this facility and the tobacco company, his role being to conceal the link. COPE’s support had been an… - Case
Duplicate publication
…their institutions, raising the issue of the wider crime of fraud. _ Overseas regulatory bodies often don’t reply, perhaps because they are uninterested or feel it is not COPE’s business to investigate misconduct. _ Check the submission letter to see if all of the authors have signed it. _ The editor should present a fuller version of the case presented at COPE to the corresponding author and all… - Case
Redundant publication
…other felt that the incident was worth a warning issued to the authors. Both editors wanted to publish a redundancy notice and to blacklist the authors for two years. They informed the authors that the issue was being referred to COPE. What does COPE think?… - Case
Suspected data fabrication
…the study meant that the pool of eligible subjects was small, and the protocol was rigorous, not to say unethical, so it would have been difficult to have obtained informed consent. What, if anything, does COPE suggest be done to investigate the suspected fraud?… - Case
The single authored, unbelievable, randomised controlled trial
…their concerns. It was not up to COPE to question the institution’s process of investigation. As the paper had been rejected the raw data could not be requested. But it was an editor’s responsibility to protect the integrity of scientific publication. The editor contacted the institution again requesting further information on this judgment. The journal is seriously considering publishing something on… - Case
Alleged plagiarism
The editor had asked the author’s institution to conduct an investigation into the issue. The editor felt that the institution’s investigation had been even handed and thorough. The aggrieved party has written back and made several points: (i) He felt that it was inappropriate to rely on an employer to make a final recommendation. i(ii) The COPE guidelines do not include rules for review… - Case
Authorship dispute
As a result of the COPE discussions the editors reversed their decision. Manuscripts will be accepted for evaluation from either author. The journal is also re-evaluating its policy guidelines. The editors decided that in this particular instance it would be inappropriate to contact the host institution.… - Case
Plagiarism or redundant publication?
_ There had been some deception and a case of redundant publication, not plagiarism. _ The authors failed to declare an overlap, and citation is not enough. _ The authors should be given a chance to reply. _ A reminder should be sent (giving a time limited response), with reference made to the COPE guidelines otherwise the matter will be referred to the authors’ institution.… - Case
Duplicate publication based on conference proceedings
A paper was submitted to Journal A and concern was raised by a reviewer that a substantial part of the paper had been previously published in two other journals. This point was taken up with the authors, who denied any lack of originality and maintained that their manuscript contained previously unpublished data. They did admit that part of the work had been presented as an invited lecture at a… - Case
Duplicate submission of a paper
…would not happen. Does COPE have any views on how this sort of situation should be prevented and what action should be taken when it does arise? The journal’s advice to authors is clear about the importance of advising if there are previous related papers that have been published or submitted.… - Case
The dubious scientist
…“destroy free HIV virus” and that it “eliminates the need” for conventional anti-retroviral drug treatment. No evidence is cited for its clinical effectiveness. The journal naturally declined to publish his editorial, but does COPE think that this case has broader implications?… - Case
Developing novel approaches to improve the assessment of absolute risk among patients with cardiovascular disease
…indication that a shortened version had already been accepted for publication in Journal B. The editors conferred and also took advice from COPE. A short letter inviting comments from the senior author of the papers was sent by the editor of Journal A and elicited a telephone response from the senior author. He apologised, but presumably because he was unaware that the editor had seen all the manuscripts,… - Case
The missing ethics committee and lack of written consent
…know of the study, and that asking people to give written consent might have reduced the numbers in the study and caused unnecessary distress. A letter was sent to the chairman of the ethics committee for his opinion, but the journal was not happy with the response received. The instinct would be not to publish the paper. What does COPE think?… - Case
Undeclared conflict of interest
…substantial payments for his work. The article related to these legal cases. The author intends to write to the complainant and ask her permission to send her letter to the author. If he accepts that he did have a competing interest, then the journal will publish a statement saying so. Does COPE agree with this? Should anything more be done?… - Case
The wrong standard deviations, the over stringent selection criteria, and the overt attempt at advertising
…low SDs. Does COPE feel that these concerns might indicate research misconduct?…