- 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… - 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
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
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
Where next in peer review? Part 1: COPE commentary
…href="https://www.niso.org/standards-committees/peer-review-terminology">standard peer review terminology to aid transparency and understanding of these differences. Others have started inviting specialist statistical review, or setting up ways of awarding credit to reviewers, for example, by publishing lists of reviewer… - News
In the news: March Digest
…retractions of their own work, as well as adding a section describing study limitations to all published articles. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/leap.1282 COPE Council Member Rachel Safer… - 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… - News
Artificial intelligence: Lightning talk summary
…The checks carried out by AI are done at various stages: as part of initial verifications, as peer review is initiated, and as it continues. Sometimes flags are raised late in the process, for example, if new data have been added to the training bank after the article went into the process. Deciding when to run checks is a complicated process, especially when a manuscript is also changing as it… - Case
Conflicts of interest between authors and editors
…should declare this and not participate in the peer reviewer assignment or any editorial decisions, and a note should ideally be added in the paper about the independence of the peer review process. If the editor were already an editor in the previous articles and took part in their review process, their peer review has been compromised. A post-publication peer review would be needed with an… - News
In the news: June 2018 Digest
…Major philanthropic organizations, like the Gates Foundation and the Wellcome Trust don’t yet require sharing of results. The reason for concern per Dr.Bruckner: over $85 billion invested into medical research goes to waste every year because results are not available. http://www.peah.it/2018/05/5322/ On May 25th, the EU’s General Data Protection… - News
Case discussion: gift authorship
…authorship came from further study of 81 of the hyperprolific authors. Of the 27 authors who completed a survey, 19 admitted failing to meet one of the four ICMJE authorship criteria in more than a quarter of their papers and 11 admitted failing to meet two or more…