The whole discussion section of a submitted case report was almost identical to the discussion section of a previously reported, similar case written up by another group of authors in another journal. The only difference lay in the patient details. While the other paper had been referenced in the case report, the authors of this case report had not indicated that the whole discussion was identical to the previously published paper. The editors wrote to the chief executive of the author’s institution. He investigated the matter and agreed that each additional case concerning the same topic as that previously reported, had to be explained in a different way. He agreed that the authors had clearly made a mistake and asked that the case report be withdrawn. He also stated that in future any similarities (such as the discussion provided in the case report) would be avoided by members of his institution when publishing scientific material.
_ 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.
No further action required.