- Case
Sections of plagiarised text in an e-publication
…the authors in question. At least seven articles were used to compile the entire manuscript: one for the abstract, four for the introduction, one for the results and one for the discussion. Overall the data look original but sections of the text are obviously not and have been in the literature for at least 13 years (1996). The authors have not been contacted to date. The COPE options… - Case
Identifying patient information published in a figure
A reader emailed a society, which forwarded the message to the journal office, noting that he can read the name of a patient in a figure in a published letter to the editor. The letter was published online 3 months earlier and had just appeared in print; it was the print version the reader saw. The reader asked if the patient's name could be removed. The journal’s author instructions alr… - Event
COPE Forum: September 2023
…href="http://publicationethics.org/resources/forum-discussion-topics/peer-review-models">welcome your comments to add to the discussion. 3. New cases 23-13 How to handle offers of promotion of authorship for sale 23-14 Concerns over the withdrawal of a complaint … - News
In the news: January 2018 Digest
…href="https://librisbloggen.kb.se/2017/12/13/the-nordic-list/" target="_blank">https://librisbloggen.kb.se/2017/12/13/the-nordic-list/ And some reflections on 2017, and thoughts about 2018 from Kent Andersonhttps://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2017/12/21/wakeup-call-looking-back-2017-factors-affecting-2018/ FORUM DISCUSSION TOPIC: comments please
…opinions in its peer review process. However, only 25% were aware of a diversity policy for recruiting members of their peer reviewer pool, and only 13% said there is in-house training to promote diversity and inclusion in peer review [3]. COPE is keen to promote diversity and inclusion in not only peer review but also scholarly publishing in general, by facilitating dialogue and developing…- Case
Unethical private practice
This single author manuscript describes the treatment of 300 women with psychological problems. The women were randomised to either therapy or pharmacological intervention, and this study reports the relative effectiveness of these strategies. At submission, the manuscript did not contain any mention of ethics approval, consent or trial registration. When the author was queried on these… - Case
Change in author’s name after publication
An original work was published in our journal in September 2010. The article had five authors. Now, in February 2013, the third author is requesting an alteration in his/her name. The original name published was SFHS. The request is to change the name to SFH, both on the journal's website and Medline. No valid reason could be provided by the author for this change in name. The last name… - Case
Editor as author of a paper
A subject editor, who oversaw a manuscript, was invited by the authors to become a co-author after the first review round. After inviting the subject editor to become an author (and adding his name to the author list), the revised version of the paper was submitted to the journal. The authors expected that a different subject editor would handle the paper in the next review round. Howeve… - Case
Authorship dispute
A manuscript was published in journal X, submitted by several co-authors, including one of the editors in chief of journal X, Dr A (the article was handled by another editor in chief at the journal). Another researcher, Dr B, has claimed that this article should be withdrawn because it contains unauthorized data from him (Dr B). A few years previously, Drs A and B worked and published jo… - Case
A case of salami slicing
A reviewer of our journal noticed similarity between a published paper (P1) and a manuscript under review (P2). At the same time, a member of the editorial team noticed similarity between another accepted manuscript for publication (P3) and both paper P1 and manuscript P2. All three papers were submitted by the same authors based on the same trial, reporting three different endpoints measuring… - Case
Two reviewer reports contain a significant amount of verbatim textual overlap
Two of four reviewer reports received by the editor-in-chief of a journal contained a significant amount of verbatim textual overlap. Although of the same native (not English) language, the two reviewers are affiliated to institutions in different countries. The reports were submitted to the journal within 5 days of each other. Both reviewers suggested rejection of the submission. Separa… - Case
Unauthorised use of data
A multicentre study conducted with a working group involving 38 centres was published in our journal. Author A was a member of one of the centres and was listed as the 13th author in the article. Another colleague (author B) who is not a coauthor and who works in the same department as author A, contacted our journal and claimed that the data from the centre used by author A in the study were… - Case
Self-plagiarism and suspected salami publishing
Journal A accepted a manuscript with six authors in June 2017, which was published in January 2018. Several months later, the editors of journal A found that journal B had published paper B, which shared striking similarities to paper A. Journal B accepted paper B in November 2017 and published it in February 2018. The first author of paper B was different but the remaining four authors were fr… - Event
COPE Lightning Talk: AI
30 January 2024, 13:00-14:00 GMT / UTC COPE members only New for 2024 COPE introduces Lightning Talks! We've created these to increase awareness and confidence in specific topics. Each talk will begin with a short introduction from experts, and then open up to discussion and questions from the audience. Join us to learn more, let us know your thoughts… - News
In the News: July Digest
…="http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2018/06/13/making-visible-the-impact-of-researchers-working-in-languages-other-than-english-developing-the-plote-index/" target="_blank">http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2018/06/13/making-visible-the-impact-of-researchers-working-in-languages-other-than-english-developing-the-plote-index/ The authors tests the ethical limits of what is acceptable for debate in scholarly… - News
In the news: March Digest
…humanities. In this next move in the debate, the authors of this blog defend their position that humanities does need to focus on the problem, and push for some actual replicability studies to be carried out.https://retractionwatch.com/2019/02/13/do… - News
In the news: September 2020
…="https://www.thebookseller.com/news/jessica-kingsley-rolls-out-first-dyslexia-friendly-industry-guidelines-1215914" target="_blank">accessible to people with dyslexia. COVID-19 The authors share concerns about the violation of some Open Science principles during the pandemic and its impact on the quality of research. They call for a wider adoption of Open Science principles to ensure research is… - Case
Personal remarks within a post-publication literature forum
We publish an online service in which faculty members (well reputed clinicians and researchers) select, rate and evaluate influential articles of their choice. Members of the faculty can submit “dissents” to evaluations: dissents are to the fact that an article is selected, as opposed to any specific faculty member’s evaluation. The original faculty members who wrote the evaluation… - Case
Findings of a published trial called into question by a subsequent audit of trial conduct
In 2008, our journal published a phase 2 randomised controlled trial of a new medicine. In 2011, the regulatory authority in the country where the study was performed decided to undertake routine monitoring of completed studies and this trial was selected for random inspection. The author informed the journal of the inspection and provided a translation of the report (independently verified as… - Case
Online posting of confidential draft by peer reviewer
Shortly before publication, I received an email from the authors of a systematic review telling me that a version of the paper as first submitted to the journal for peer review had appeared on the website of a campaign group based in the USA. It was clear that the version of the document posted on the website was the same as the version supplied to the journal's peer reviewers. Further investig…