- Case
An author thinks that a journal’s decision not to publish is ethically incorrect
A submitted paper reported on the investigation and management of an outbreak of a disease in a work environment (Company A). The authors acknowledged the referring physician from the workplace—who had declined on legal advice to be listed as an author—and also declared that the lead author had provided medical advice for remuneration to Company A during legal proceedings related to the… - Case
An article in a high profile journal that potentially misappropriates research published in lower impact journals
…concerns, as have several other high profile scientists in the field, including some whose work has also been appropriated. These scientists have each asked Journal A to investigate the peer review process for the paper in question. The author of the paper in Journal B has also asked the editor of Journal A if s/he might write a piece, to be published in Journal A, to ‘set the record straight’. This… - Case
Ukrainian authors request retraction of article in Russian conference proceedings
…notice of withdrawal be drawn up? How can we protect the authors? Update Given the critical situation of this very specific case the publisher had to act prior to the Forum. They decided after collecting the approval of all the authors and the editor in charge of this paper to fully withdraw this article from the publication. They published a note without… - Case
Duplicate publication
In 2003 a paper was published in a specialist surgical journal following proper peer review. The paper summarised the experience of a group of clinicians concerned in treating malignancy in the Head and Neck using a novel method of therapy - and was a case series of 25 patients. The paper was not considered to be one of high priority but was published because of the paucity of information… - Case
Pedigree descriptions: genotyping results for family members
…form in patient records and update the paper to state that consent to publication has been obtained). The authors responded that when initially obtaining consent to the research project, patients consented that “[t]he results from studies on the research samples may be published, but individual patients will not be identified in the publications”. They claim that details included are not… - Case
Authorship order dispute
…Drs C and E, with the oversight of Dr F as the head of department. Dr D is adamant that she should be first or second author on the paper (rather than third as she currently is), and said that she intends to block publication if this is not done, even though she has said that she will not work in academia again and is not interested in academic rewards. As head of department, Dr F is not… - Case
Sufficient consent?
It was argued that if there is no consent then the paper should be rejected. In the Netherlands all interventions are reported, and the author would have been questioned why they had no approval. In the UK the GMC might take disciplinary action. What ever sort of consent occurs, there should be a detailed audit trail - there needs to be some sort of evidence. If this was a UK case then… - Case
Authorship dispute
The paper in question describes a collaborative study of several datasets (not all previously published). A putative referee was asked to review the paper and declined. However, this led to a written complaint asserting that (s)he should be an author as (s)he had made a significant contribution to some of the work described in the paper. After promising comments from referees, the… - Case
Institution wants to retract despite ongoing legal proceedings
…publication of article A and before publication of article B, a senior colleague of author A at institution A contacted publisher A asking for article A to be retracted. The claimant said author A had left institution A after the submission to journal A but before publication. The claimant alleged that author A used other researchers’ data without permission and used the affiliation without approval… - Case
Author admits failure to credit other authors
…group to determine the source of the error and to resolve the list and order of authors. The AOR acknowledged that he should have credited additional authors. All authors agreed with the corrected list of authors, but the AOR insisted on being the first author and the other authors did not agree. Pursuant to COPE guidelines, the editor contacted the university of the AOR for assistance and… - Case
Surprising results and a new area of research
A paper described an unusual approach to disease modulation in an experimental animal model. The apparently clear cut findings were somewhat surprising. The authors also seem to have used high and low power photomicrographs of the same tissue sections to illustrate completely different experiments within the study. This occurred twice in the paper. Furthermore, this particular area of study was… - Case
Data manipulation and institute’s internal review
A journal received an enquiry from a reader stating that they had found some discrepancies in the spectra published in the electronic supporting information for a published paper. They suggested that the discrepancies would be consistent with the spectra being manually ‘cleaned’. If this were true, the characterisation and purity of the compounds reported in the paper would be called into… - Case
Using the name of a scientific society inappropriately
…authors, publishing an expression of concern right away would be appropriate. COPE views editors as stewards of the literature, so if the literature is now misleading then in needs to be corrected. If the paper purports to be from representatives of two learned societies, the leadership of both societies should be brought into the picture, as the paper may misrepresent one if not both society's… The ethics of audit and research
…are issues around the ossification of process, how innovation and change can be accommodated, and about the perverse incentives that any bureaucratic system imposes on everyone who interacts with it. In a recent paper in the BMJ (2005; 330: 468-73), Derek Wade…- News
Alltrials.net
Alltrials.net is a UK group behind a public campaign to call for all trials to be registered and all results reported. COPE has agreed to support this initiative with the following statement: "COPE supports the AllTrials initiative for all trials to be registered and all results reported. Publication ethics is not just about such issues as… Authorship and AI tools
…COPE position statement The use of artificial intelligence (AI) tools such as ChatGPT or Large Language Models in research publications is expanding rapidly. COPE joins organisations, such as WAME and the JAMA Network among others, to state that AI tools cannot be…Case Submitted
Thank you for submitting your case to COPE. The case will be anonymised and considered for the next Forum meeting. If you have any queries about your case before then, please contact the COPE Administrator here, quoting the case number if you have one. Please note that advice from the COPE Forum…- Event
COPE Forum: 8 November 2016 8am & 4pm (GMT)
The November COPE Forum, where we discuss cases submitted by members, will be held on Tuesday 8 November 2016 at both 8am and 4pm (GMT). The COPE Forum will be held virtually via webinar. This month we're starting the COPE Forum with an AMA session (Ask Me Anything). AMAs can be new issues or developments on existing issues. Last time we did an AMA session there was one question that… - Case
The anonymous critic
…submitted “nonsense data.” Our correspondents were “absolutely astonished” that we are publishing this letter. Given these anonymous claims, what should be done next?… - Case
Author dispute and dual submission
…expressing concern, but after six weeks none of them had responded. A further letter was sent advising them that if a response was not received within 10 working days then the head of their respective institutions would be informed. This produced a response from two of the authors who accepted that there had been poor communication and admitted that the paper had been sent, presumably simultaneously, to…