- Case
Dispute over submitted comment and the right to be forgotten
…we have not heard from you, we will publish the comment without your reply'. If the authors refuse to reply formally and answer the points, then an editorial note can be added that the authors were invited but declined to reply. Ultimately the decision of how best to correct the literature should fall to the editor, so the complication that the new editor-in-chief does not want to be… - Case
Using the name of a scientific society inappropriately
…that it had not been consulted or involved in drafting the article, and added that none of its members was an author on the paper. In the paper, there is only mention of the consensus between the two scientific societies in the title, and the body of the paper only includes the actual clinical recommendations. Moreover, the authors of the published article only included their clinical affiliations… - Forum discussion topics
Coordinating multi-journal complaints
…Related resources Dealing with concerns about the integrity of published research COPE discussion document Your comments Anyone (members and non-members) can comment on this discussion. Comments are reviewed and, on approval, added below.… - Case
Ethical conduct of qualitative research studies
Publishers are seeing an increase in submitted data generated from qualitative research studies. These studies are answering important questions such as identifying unmet need or highlighting the lived experience, potentially adding real value to the body of evidence especially in rare diseases. They are often Pharma funded and / or patient advocacy group led. Many of these studies have… - Case
Rescind a decision post-acceptance prior to publication
…saying people will try to pay us to shut down the paper before it is published. This has added an extra layer of concern to how the situation is handled. We think we should take the following steps: Contact the author to explain the manuscript requires further peer review. Send the manuscript for two further sets of peer review comments. Provide the author with the new set of… - Case
Alleged unauthorized use of data and possible dual publication
…Since the reviewer’s evaluation of the method did not contain any concrete arguments, the senior author assumed that the reviewer was referring to a polemic about the method by another author, published in the same journal in which the senior author countered these arguments. The method continues to be the most widely used, cited over 90 times (the associate editor points out that it was cited mainly… - News
Case discussion: self-plagiarism and suspected salami publishing
…a published manuscript and asked the authors for an explanation. The editorial board concluded that this case did not represent redundant or salami publication, but did satisfy its criteria for text recycling. A relevant note was added to paper A and journal B was informed. Case Discussion This archived COPE Forum case is categorised under two COPE Core Practices,… - News
Case discussion: repeated complaints about a review
…overturned by new research thanks to technological or methodological advancements. Furthermore, data or findings from new research should not normally be added post-publication as a correction to update a paper; a new research paper should be prepared. Nevertheless, some journals do allow authors to publish meta-analysis update articles and online continually updated (“ - Case
The tortuous tale of a paper, a letter and an editorial
Dr A submitted an article to journal X that was published in 1996. Dr B wrote to the editor in January 1997, pointing out an error by Dr A. Shortly afterwards, Dr B submitted a longer editorial to the journal discussing the issue raised by this error in a much wider context. Dr B then withdrew the article and submitted it to journal Y at the end of March, with a covering letter in which he wrot… - Case
Possible fabricated data: a conspiracy of silence?
This complicated case provoked much discussion. The advice was to reinstate the review but without the three disputed papers, adding a note to say that there is a potential problem with these three papers. It was felt that if the data are fabricated, there was a responsibility on the part of the editor not to publish the data as there might be a significant risk to patients if the trial was… - Case
Withdrawal of acceptance based on potentially unconsented data
…/06/22/tortuous-and-torturous-why-publishing-a-critical-letter-to-the-editor-is-so-difficult/">this discussion at Retraction Watch). An intermediate solution might be to consider adding a note indicating that the articles were retracted and why. The journal could then ask the authors of the letters to adapt what they have written with this in mind and focus on what else they might want to… - Forum discussion topics
Ethical considerations around book publishing
…(members and non-members) can comment on this discussion. Comments are reviewed and, on approval, added below.… - Forum discussion topics
Claiming institutional affiliations
…affiliations Khaled Moustafa, Arabixiv Papers A summary of the discussion at the virtual Forum event will be added to this page shortly. Page updated: 12 December 2023 We welcome comments on… - News
In the news: June Digest
…target="_blank">https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-018-05145-6 According to a study of 80 cases investigated by the US Office of Research Integrity, the first author of a paper is 38% more likely to be responsible for identified misconduct than the other authors. Should she or he be held accountable? All of the authors? Just the senior author? Arguments for these different ideas are presented here--illustrating that the answer isn't clear. - News
Case Discussion: Withdrawal of paper at proof stage
…="https://publicationethics.org/case/dual-submission-and-editor%E2%80%99s-failure-take-action">19-06, Dual submission and editor’s failure to take action), the copyright for a paper published in a journal was held by another journal because the authors did not formally withdraw their earlier submission. This case illustrates what might happen if editorial office processes and communications are unclear or inconsistent. The second relevant COPE Core… - News
In the news: October Digest
…="https://cen.acs.org/research-integrity/misconduct/China-strengthens-campaign-against-scientific/97/i35" target="_blank">https://cen.acs.org/research-integrity/misconduct/China-strengthens-campaign-against-scientific/97/i35 Interviews with 21 journal editors from North America across multiple disciplines about their thoughts about text recycling (AKA "Self-plagiarism") shows a wide-range of tolerance for the practice, from tolerance of it in some circumstances to absolute… - Case
Disagreement between a reviewer and an author
We sent a paper to a reviewer, who suggested that we should reject the paper, principally because he thought it “virtually identical to a paper in press by the same authors”. We rejected the paper with these comments. The author came back to us saying that he did not believe that he had had a fair review of his paper because, he thought, the reviewer had a conflict of interest. He wrote: “The… - Case
Authorship issue
…now left the institution). Dr A held the IRB. Dr A had instructed Dr C not to publish until the mother paper was completed. Dr C was asked by the editors to comment on these points, and he responded by saying that: the intellectual contribution from Drs A and B was minimal; he (Dr C) had added the relevant addendum to the IRB myself; Drs A and B had threatened to ruin his career if he did… - Case
Author requests for certain experts not to be included in the editorial process
…a policy for handling requests to exclude individuals from the journal’s editorial process. The following has been added to the journal’s editorial policy: “We reserve the right to send manuscripts to the reviewers of our choice”. The editor considers the case closed. Related resource Spanish version: - Case
Professional misconduct of one author
…a valid reason for issuing a correction to the literature. Moreover, if ICMJE authorship criteria are being used, the reason for removal of an author needs to be added; it must be an academic reason; and all authors would have to agree and sign off in…