- Case
Case histories and post publication debate
The Forum suggested that the steps outlined by the journal as a way of proceeding are good and reasonable. If the post-publication comments are informed, then it may be fine to publish them but this must be done carefully. Peer review can be helpful here. Letters to the editor commenting on case reports could include disclaimers, and it is important to remind people to think about the… - Case
Suspected unattributed text in a published article
The journal’s review of the guidelines on text recycling led to the conclusion that the scientific content was not disputed, and in fact the article adds to the body of knowledge. Also, the text recycling was not in the discussion or conclusions but rather in the methodology. The journal decided not to publish an expression of concern or retract the publication. The editor considers the case… - Case
Critical comment and conflict of interest
…matter. Having author X's review examined by experts is reasonable under the circumstances as insurance. There are no grounds for retraction here. A correction could be considered depending on the outcome of the review. The journal could have saved itself a lot of problems if it had approached Dr Y at the time of Dr X's submission and allowed them to defend their work, especially if 'The… - Case
Publication of an article accepted 5 years ago
Several years ago a previous editor of a journal accepted an article for publication following peer review. The current editor feels that the article should not have been accepted in the first instance, but rejected instead. After acceptance, the article was sent to a copy editor who was scheduled to work on it. However, the process was stopped by the previous editor and the copy editor. The… - Case
When to conclude correspondence from reader about errors in a published article
The Forum questioned the decision by the journal to invite Dr A to write a formal letter to the editor. It may have been more useful for the editor to make it clear to Dr A that any letter to the editor would go through the normal peer review process. If concerns are raised by a reader, the usual approach would be to contact the authors regarding these concerns and to determine whether… - Case
Image duplication
The editor received an allegation of image falsification from a whistleblower relating to two papers published more than ten years previously (under the previous editor and publisher). A senior editor reviewed the allegations according to COPE guidelines, and decided there was evidence of image duplication. The allegations were then put to the author who was unable to supply the original data… - Case
Would the loss of a clinical licence in one country impact on the ability to do clinical work in another?
…mention in the conflict of interest statement regarding the loss of license. The role of author Y in the paper is not clear. The editor was planning to ask this after peer review was completed. Question(s) for the COPE Forum• Should loss of a licence to practice in one country be declared as part of a conflict of interest statement?• Does loss of licence to practice in… - Case
Satire in scholarly publishing
…that there has always been a place for humour in scholarly publishing, and several established medical journals regularly publish satire. They commented that the authors of the systematic review failed to thoroughly read the satirical article and did not fulfil their scholarly responsibility in performing the review. Question(s) for the COPE Forum• Does the publication of satire… - Case
Lead author of a research paper disagrees with content of a linked editorial
…of his complaints into account. The author requested that he be allowed to read the revised editorial and suggested that it should be sent for peer review. These requests were refused. However, at a press briefing just prior to publication, the authors saw a final version of the revised editorial. They contacted the journal and indicated they were dissatisfied with the revised editorial.… - Case
Two cases of double submission
…(copying in the institution). The journal should take some responsibility for helping to set the stage for this type of author misconduct with the apparently very long review times. The journal may need to review, reinforce or clarify their author guidelines. It may be necessary for the editor/journals to reinforce/clarify their policy and author guidelines. Since the… - Case
Registration of a randomised control trial
Journal A received a manuscript—a randomised, controlled, double anonymous, parallel clinical trial. The manuscript was reviewed by two specialist reviewers who suggested acceptance after revision. One of the important points that was asked was to provide the “registration number of the RCT”. As our journal is a member of the ICMJE, we reviewed the instructions of the ICMJE and found that… - Case
Editor found guilty of research misconduct
…articles, nine reviews, three editorials/commentaries and one case study. As far as the journal is aware, there are no substantive issues with any of these papers, which underwent the usual review procedures, but several reference the fictitious person in the acknowledgements. During his time as editorial registrar, he had input in editorial decisions, as a reviewer and associate editor, and by… - Seminars and webinars
European Seminar 2017: Translating institutional integrity issues into educational initiatives across Asia-Pacific
At the 2017 COPE European Seminar, Mai Har Sham, Associate Vice President (Research) of the University of Hong Kong presented on 'Translating institutional integrity issues into educational initiatives across Asia-Pacific'. Mai Har's talk covered: Research Integrity @ HKU Challenges with alleged research misconduct cases Promoting Responsible Conduct of Res… - Seminars and webinars
European Seminar 2017: Publication and research integrity, a Wellcome perspective
At the 2017 COPE European Seminar, Robert Kiley from the Wellcome Trust presented Wellcome's perspective on publication and research integrity. The event was filmed, which you can watch below, and the slides are also available. - Seminars and webinars
European Seminar 2017: Arts, humanities, and social sciences. What do we need from COPE?
At the 2017 COPE European Seminar, Deborah Kahn, Publishing Director of Medicine and Open Access at Taylor & Francis presented her thoughts on what the arts, humanities and social sciences need from an organisation such as COPE. … - Case
Unhelpful institution report
…reviews have failed to investigate thoroughly enough to reassure editors, what further investigations might be warranted? And by whom? • Is there sufficient doubt remaining for an expression of concern? Or should we accept the results of the investigations even if we consider them inadequate? … - Case
Editor manipulation of impact factor
…field. However, acceptance of an article should not be contingent on introduction of inappropriate or tangential citations. For reviewers, when authors self-cite for more of the authors’ prior work, an extra check by editorial staff is needed. The new CEO at Clarivate in charge of impact factor issues is Annette Thomas. She holds an AMA (Ask Me Anything) Reddit on a regular basis according to… - Case
Duplicate publication in multicentre consortia
Two closely related journals received a series of manuscripts each based on descriptions of a complex medical procedure by multicentre consortia. At least three separate consortia submitted three separate papers. Each consortium included centres which were shared between the three groups and likely have the same patients/procedures represented in different reports. For example: … - Case
Authorship issues from disbanded consortium
…hold during these checks. The corresponding author was unhappy at the delay in publication. They denigrated and questioned the integrity of the institution where these researchers were based and claimed that one of three authors was involved in perverting peer review in another, named, journal (not related to the publisher). The corresponding author made it clear that they would refuse to accept any…