- Case
Simultaneous publication
About a month after our journal (Journal A) published a paper (Paper X), the journal received emails from readers that Paper X was very similar to a paper (Paper Y) that had just been published by another journal (Journal B). Some of these emails were sent to both journal offices. Paper X was submitted to Journal A a few days before Paper Y was submitted to Journal B and Paper X wa… - Case
Using the name of a scientific society inappropriately
A journal published an article about clinical recommendations for a condition that supposedly was the result of a consensus between two scientific societies of different medical specialties. The article underwent peer review and no problems were identified at that stage. However, about one month after publication the journal was contacted by one of the scientific societies raising concerns that… - Case
Authorship issue related to misleading action of one author
Our journal received a manuscript which was a report of an evaluation and enhancement of an online clinical decision support system (CDS) for a specific population at risk of a disease. The online CDS had been developed by a national agency with a mission to support health promotion and disease prevention activities. Evaluation of the CDS was supported through contracts and sub-contracts. The f… - Case
Disputed change in authorship
A case control study was submitted to a journal. It was subjected to the usual peer review processes. After the required revisions, the article was accepted for publication. After acceptance, the journal received a letter from the corresponding author (author A) with a request to add the name of a new author (author B). The journal declined, stating that it would be unethical. The… - News
Data and reproducibility: The role of research institutions
…href="https://www.force11.org/group/fairgroup/fairprinciples" target="_blank">FAIR Data Principles -- making research data “Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Re-usable”, it falls on funders, publishers, researchers and their institutions to establish practices and policies for the appropriate handling of research data. Research institutions -- as the home of significant research data production and management -- have a particularly critical role… Common ethical and editorial dilemmas of author misconduct: how should we respond?
…"Evidence of misconduct" "Probably no misconduct" Not applicable 1997 16 11 0 5 1998 33 30 2 1 1999 27 20 3 4 2000 32 26 6…- News
In the news: May 2021
…target="_blank">piece describes CRediT in more detail including details of the new ORCID implementation. Preprints The demand for rapid circulation of information during the COVID-19 pandemic has changed the way research, especially medical research, is being shared, with a massive increase in the use of preprint servers, with their associated advantages and disadvantages. This has highlighted the… - Case
Data fabrication, lack of ethical approval, withdrawal of paper and publication in another journal
This query refers to a clinical trial comparing two forms of treatment which has since been published in another journal. I originally received this manuscript in 2009. One of the referees alerted me to the fact that the data looked strange. Furthermore, the test and controls groups were perfectly distributed, which is almost impossible. Along with the usual requests for modifications, I… - Case
What extent of plagiarism demands a retraction versus correction?
A short research article described a new method and tested the method, showing proof-of-concept that the method worked; the idea for the method is presented as the authors’ own. On publication, the paper receives an overwhelmingly positive response from the community. Shortly after publication, the editorial team is contacted by a PhD student and their supervisor who had published the id… - Case
Unethical withdrawal of a paper
…future and wanted to verify with them that his intended action—a ban for double submission—was suitable. On returning from meeting with the publishers, Editor A discovered that the paper had never been withdrawn from consideration and the review process was now complete (entire review process 28 days). The reviewer comments warranted rejection. Editor A sent a rejection letter to Authors A and… - News
Guest article: Avoiding predatory publishers
…because all the translations have been provided by volunteer researchers and librarians. Think.Check.Submit. exists because of the support of nine industry organizations - Case
Mislabelling/duplicate images
We were contacted by a reader who told us that he had spotted a number of cases of image duplication and mislabelling of fluorescent tags that had occurred over the past 4 years. These involved two papers published in our journal, and two other papers published in two different journals. The two papers in our journal were both reviews, and the one that had the most occurrences involved a poster… - Case
Inappropriate authorship on students paper
A cross-sectional, questionnaire-based study which was a final year student's project was submitted as an original article to our journal on 30 April 2011. On initial review it was obvious that it was conducted by students and written by them, but the list of authors had the supervisor as the first author, followed by 13 students. The supervisor, who was also the corresponding author, wa… - Case
Meta-analysis: submission of unreliable findings
A meta-analysis was conducted of about 1000 patients included in a number of small trials of a drug for emergency management administered by route X compared with route Y. The report concluded that administration by route X improves short term survival. Chronology The paper was submitted to our journal in September 2011 and after peer review was retur… - Forum discussion topics
Systematic manipulation of the publishing process via “paper mills”
…href="https://publicationethics.org/resources/research/paper-mills-research">Paper mills research report, COPE & STM, 2022 Systematic manipulation of the publication process, COPE guidance updated 2022 Potential “paper mills” and what to do about them – a publisher’s… - News
Post-publication conflicts of interest
…Trevor Lane on behalf of the COPE Education Subcommittee Related resources Editorial conflicts of interest COPE Forum discussion 2022 - News
Guest article: Research misconduct
…="https://www.nationalacademies.org/news/2019/09/reproducibility-and-replicability-in-research">reproducibility and that, ultimately, science is self-correcting. The direct relationship between science, our everyday lives and the slow iterative nature of the scientific process has been illustrated by Covid-19 vaccinations which were developed in record time only because of the Membership application FAQ
…than one full-time equivalent paid member of staff per journal (ie, run mainly on voluntary efforts) and with zero income/funding from any source (including from a publisher). Can I apply for membership for my university or research institute? In 2022 COPE launched a new membership category to support university and research institute members who:- News
Case discussion: Consequence for dual submission
…submission”, or “simultaneously submitted” return fewer cases. Performing a Boolean search for ["multiple submission" + "questionable behaviour (author)"] returns 12 cases: the case under discussion and 11 others. Case discussion In COPE Forum… - News
In the news: June 2021
Each month, COPE Council members find and share publication ethics news. This month the news includes articles on intellectual property, preprints, peer review, and more. Data and reproducibility The Food and Drug Administration in the USA informed Accleron Pharma that…