- Case
Unauthorised reviewer challenges
…submission system and which included all of the author details. In total, the email is estimated to have been received by around 440 individuals. One of the recipients of the email contacted the society’s editorial office (EO) to report what had happened. The EO contacted the editor-in-chief and handling editor of the paper to see if they knew anything about the situation, but the reviewer had not… - Case
Suspicion that signed informed consent forms are forged
…to take further action, especially if they are dealing with a hospital, which may not have the same research integrity staff as a university. In the current case, and based on the details given, it seems reasonable for the editors to be concerned about the consent forms that have been submitted, as well as any future version of them. Moreover, if the authors have manipulated these forms,… - Case
Stolen ownership of a rare case
…the journal will not take further action until they receive a judgement. In the meantime an expression of concern which outlines the situation would be a way to inform readers that there is a potential issue especially if the situation might take some time to resolve. Ultimately, if the authors do not have ownership of the case they cannot publish it as theirs. In that case a retraction may… - Case
Authorship dispute
…explanations and counter-allegations. Although the journal feels it should publish Y’s dissociation from the article in the journal, would it be wise to publish this without anything from X? Additionally, if the editors are sure that X submitted the article without the approval of his supposed co-authors, should action be taken against him, such as barring him from publishing in the journal for a period of… - Case
Plagiarism
…made to the source. If warranted, however, the corresponding author would take action regarding present and future submissions from this author. New procedures would also be put into place to prevent a recurrence of this unfortunate event. Finally, the corresponding author felt that a positive aspect of this incident was that it demonstrated the high calibre of the reviewers, and thanked them for… - Case
Babies needlessly subjected to a painful procedure for research
_ The editors should pursue the issue further and approach the head of the authors’ institution, and if necessary, involve higher authorities. _ A deadline should be imposed for a response. _ As there appeared to be a discrepancy between the authors’ assertion that the sampling was undertaken as part of a routine procedure and the fact that the trial sample would have to be an additional… - Case
“Research” without ethics committee approval
…particular authors are responsible to a national regulatory body, the editor should report his concerns to that body after informing the authors of his intention to do so. _ If the researchers are working in a private hospital, such hospitals do have research governance frameworks.… - Case
Dispute between authors and a reviewer
…the authors and ask them to sort out the dispute before publication can go ahead. - One option might be to publish a letter alongside the article setting out the points of dispute, if the authors cannot resolve it.… - Case
Author’s name removed from submitted article
…protocol and, as this was an NHS funded study, this information may be available in the public domain. It was felt that it would be quite acceptable for the editor to request a copy of the protocol from the authors of the paper, to confirm the name of the PI. If the editor is worried by his (minor) involvement with the study, he should let his deputy editor deal with the case.… - Case
Plagiarism in a systematic review
…specific aspect of the previously published review, but the format is identical and large portions of the text are either directly copied or only slightly modified from that review. The authors refer to the previous review in their introduction but do not attribute any of the copied material to it. There is no overlap in authorship between the two reviews. Even if… - Case
A pre-submission inquiry with a bribe
…thank me for ultimately accepting the papers. This is the first time in all my years of editing that I have come across a clear bribe attempt. My main concern is whether I can/should report this situation (and if so, how and to whom) even though the author did not provide any information apart from the name of the affiliations and institution. Question(s) for the COPE Forum - Case
Possible plagiarism
…retraction/correction processes for books. It is not considered by book authors or editors as a standard process. While plagiarism in books seems to be common, there are no clear guidelines on how to handle it. However, the Forum would still advise following the COPE flowcharts on plagiarism and contacting the institution if appropriate. … - Case
Concerns over the withdrawal of a complaint
…inform their institution that they have withdrawn their complaint, even if the journal is still obliged to investigate. Second, the journal can state that they are keeping the identity of the source anonymous in order to protect them. Ultimately, however, it is the integrity of the article which is the editor’s key concern.… - Case
Handling undisclosed peer reviewer conflict
…the paper; thus they had felt that there was no conflict. The Forum agreed that the reviewer did have an interest which should have been declared. They should either have raised this with the editor, allowing the journal to make a decision on how to handle the situation, or declined to write a review. The editors should dismiss this review and seek a replacement if their policy is to… - Flowcharts
How to recognise potential manipulation of the peer review process
…review or publishing process. Related resources Cómo reconocer la potencial manipulación del proceso de revisión por pares - Flowcharts
When institutions are contacted by journals
…integrity of the research record CLUE Guidelines, Cooperation and liaison between universities and editors Your feedback Do you use this flowchart? We welcome your feedback. You must be logged in to leave a comment on the COPE website. If you are not a member of COPE you can - Case
Reader concerns about ethics approval and consent from a vulnerable population
…exist in the published paper. The affiliation for each author is mentioned. Which institutional research ethics committee authorised the study is also known. If the institution does not agree with what their faculty member has published, the institution should publish its objection on its website. Furthermore, if the author’s action was unethical, the institution may take disciplinary action against… Submitting a guest editorial or opinion piece to COPE
…the editors, COPE Digest. COPE Trustees and Council Members will be welcome to submit under the same guidance as above. Authors If more than one author, all authors should have made a significant contribution to the work and agree to be accountable for the parts of the work they have done. All authors should approve the final version for publication. Details of…- Case
Case of figure duplication and manipulation involving two journals
…author and given him the opportunity to respond. He has not responded to date. The Forum agreed that the editor can go ahead with the retractions, even if the accused author does not respond. The Forum suggested contacting all of the authors and giving them the opportunity to respond. However, some suggested that if the editor is in doubt about any aspects of the case, he should wait for the… - Case
Compromised peer review system in published papers
…influencing the peer review process. If the journal wishes to stand by these papers, then it is essential that all of the papers are re-reviewed. In the meantime, an expression of concern should be issued for all of these papers. One suggestion was to inform the author of the course of action that the journal is going to undertake and see if he wishes to retract all of these papers. The Forum noted…