- Case
Reviewer requests to be added as an author after publication
…conflict of interest or request that they should be an author on the paper. The reviewer returned a very good review and along with another two reviews (R2/R3), and after revision (where the revision once again was sent to R1) the paper was accepted and published. A few months later, the journal was approached by another researcher (E1 who is from the same laboratory as R1) who said that… - Case
Dual submission
_ Around one in five published papers are republished in substantial form. _ A study in the 80s found that over 10 per cent did not mention previous publication, but a second study at the end of the 90s suggested this figure was around 1%. _ It takes considerable time and effort to look at all the referenced papers to see if there is any overlap and then those are the published ones, not those… - Event
Scholarly publishing in a connected world: Turning disruptions into opportunities
…publishing industry more widely. There will be tips on how to spot and deal with suspected paper mill submissions and guidance on how to manage large scale paper mills. Read more and register… - Case
Conflicts of interest between authors and editors
…peer review policy). Any CoIs must be logged on the checklist so that the EiC can decide whether to invite another editor. However, as the published articles for which we have now discovered CoIs were accepted some time ago, and the AE of those published articles has no other conflicts of interest with the authors, can we consider this a special situation? We are thinking, for example, of… - News
Collaboration
…in the Digest and include an upcoming workshop with the “Russell Group” and COPE members (mix of publishers and editors) to discuss research integrity and publication ethics. This is planned for April 2018 at Birmingham University, UK. A report will be produced following the workshop. COPE seminars are planned for China, Australia, North… - News
Wiley launch new ethics guidelines
Wiley has launched the second edition of its Best Practice Guidelines on Publishing Ethics: A Publisher’s Perspective. In the new edition, guidance has been added about whistle-blowers, animal research and clinical research, particularly around clinical trial registration. The press release can be read in full APAME 2013 Tokyo
…APAME 2013 Tokyo Asia Pacific Association of Medical Editors (APAME) Convention 2013, Tokyo, Japan Date: 2–4 August 2013 Venue: Japan Medical Association (JMA) Auditorium, 2-28-16, Honkomagome, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo 113-8621, Japan COPE will hold two 90 minute sessions on the afternoon of 3 August during the annual congress of the…- Event
ISMPP webinar: Graphical Presentation of Data in Medical Publications
ISMPP invites you to attend this special 90-minute ISMPP University educational webinar, on Wednesday January 25 at 11 am ET/4 pm GMT. The webinar is free to all regardless of ISMPP membership status. Webinar attendees will learn from experts about how to integrate essential graphical presentation elements into medical publications. Figures, tables and images contribute to data interpretation… - Case
Plagiarism or redundant publication?
A manuscript was submitted with a covering letter clearly stating the originality and unpublished nature of the work. The authors stated that the results had already been orally presented at a meeting the previous year. Before sending the manuscript for review the editors discovered that the manuscript contained 60% of the Materials and Methods text and 90% of the Results section of… - Event
COPE Forum: September 2023
COPE Members: join us for the COPE Forum where participants discuss publication ethics issues submitted by Members. The Forum will begin with a discussion on "Peer review models" before we ask participants for advice on Members' cases. REGISTER TODAY Submit a case to… - News
Letter from the COPE Chair: December 2021
…="https://www.elsevier.com/connect/reviewers-update/the-case-for-more-diversity-in-peer-review">Elsevier making the case for more diversity in peer review, and others. I hope you find this issue of COPE Digest interesting and informative, and that you go into 2022 with a renewed drive to continue to improve diversity and inclusivity in scholarly publications. - Case
Retrospective ethical approval?
…ethics committee who would consider giving this retrospectively. A subsequent email from the chairman of the ethics committee to the journal expressed doubt about the value of retrospective approval, pointing out that when a study was reviewed prospectively it was possible to suggest changes to the protocol, which obviously could not be done when it was viewed retrospectively. The chairman added that… - Case
Can two DOIs be assigned to the same manuscript?
…publication, two DOIs are required. The final published version should have been improved by the peer review process and so there can be two DOIs for the original preprint and the published version of record. A note should be added to the preprint version to state that the article has been published. Also, the author should acknowledge the previous version in the new manuscript as a reference or… - News
Letter from the COPE Chair: June 2022
…href="https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-022-01604-3">diversity, equity, and fairness in global collaborations, which will be released soon. It was wonderful that the meeting took place in Africa for the first time, and we were able to hear from those directly impacted by historic inequities in financial and scientific resources. As COPE Chair, I moderated a symposium panel on “When and how to report misconduct to institutions, journals,… - News
In the news: February 2018 Digest
…would be associated with higher rates of this behavior. One journal used badges and the other did not. The rate of data sharing, but not code sharing, was higher in the journal that awarded badges. While the results were only modest, the authors suggest that this is a reasonable, low cost way of incentivizing code and data sharing. - Case
Attempt at dual publication
…comparison found the manuscripts to be approximately 90% the same, with entire sections duplicated. Differences comprised slightly poorer language usage in the recent submission, some single sentence updates, one extra paragraph in one section and some changes to the conclusions. Some sections from the published review had been deleted to fit our shorter word limits. No reference to the earlier publication… - News
Creating and implementing research data policies: COPE webinar report
…consistently implemented. Quick polls that were held during the webinar revealed that most of the audience had experience of journal data policies as a publisher or editor (85%). Only 9% had not had any experience of journal data policies. Of those who had, most had encountered policies that encouraged data sharing (80%) or required a data availability statement (80%). Fewer had encountered mandatory…