- Case
Problem with figures
…the proposed strategy achieved unanticipated therapeutic success in a preclinical model of XXX. I am writing because I’ve noticed a major problem in Figure X. It appears that two of the panels (X and X), which are supposed to be representative of two different XX specimens from two different experimental groups, belong to the same tissue section (or quasi-identical serial… - News
COPE Members: update your member details
…working on your journal(s) keep up to date with publication ethics issues and gives access to all COPE resources. If you have any problems updating your details please contact us.… - Translated resources
Webinar 2020: research and publishing ethics challenges and best practices
…href="https://publicationethics.org/files/research-publishing-ethics-chinese.pdf" target="_blank">presentation in Chinese (PDF, 4.79 MB) Page history Page last updated: August 2020 … - Forum discussion topics
COPE Forum 10 June 2015: Prior publication and theses
…class="resource-download-inline__container"> Notes from forum discussion topic on prior publication and theses PDF 209… - Case
Duplicate publication based on government data
This is a case for the record. No further action need be taken.… - Case
Submission of a paper by a reviewer
…people in the same areas to review, and if it is a small area of research the choice of referees can be very limited. _ No harm had been done as the author of the letter openly admitted his conversation with the other author and had been encouraged to submit it. _ The editor was therefore right to review the letter in the usual way.… - Case
Referee with a conflict of interest
…refereeing for the journal that he was planning to submit a closely related competing article. Should this be taken further?… - Case
Undeclared conflict of interest
…but the options should be reviewed once the national regulatory body’s investigation have completed.… - Case
Lack of ethics committee approval?
…extensive study would not be granted approval. The authors were happy to refrain from their more extensive plans, and realised that the interviews they had carried out so far yielded interesting information anyway and would make a good research paper. They informed the ethics committee that they were not carrying out the original study, and they have not specifically received approval for the current… - Case
The case of a physician in private practice offering an experimental intervention
A physician in private practice wrote to our journal asking if we were interested in a paper discussing his experience of offering a novel intravenous therapy to his patients. He hoped we wouldn’t discriminate against him for being an author in private practice. He had given this therapy to nine patients with a variety of acute and chronic illnesses, including himself. The physician says that… - Case
Interpretation of regulations: when is a waiver of authorisation acceptable?
…circumstances, the privacy review board may waive authorisation and allow publication without explicit consent to publish from patients. - Should the regulations apply equally to healthcare providers and research scientists? - In what circumstances would the privacy review board's waiver of authorisation be acceptable?… - Case
Dual submission
…possibly somewhat naïve, but the editor confirmed that they had published previously. It was felt that the most appropriate course of action would be to write to the authors again, in the strongest terms possible, asking for an explanation and giving them a deadline by which to reply. If no reply is received, then the editor should write to their head of department or institution, laying out the… - Case
Should we always follow the decisions of ethics committees?
The Forum were unanimous in their view that this appears to be unethical behaviour on the part of the authors. The editor should ask to see copies of the information given to parents and the consent forms as it was felt that this information was probably inadequate. Further advice was to write to the authors’ institutions and inform them of the authors’ actions, and also to contact the ethics… - Case
Retractions of primary literature papers: how should a review journal react?
…order unless (till) proven otherwise. In fairness, I think that if any corrective measure is to be taken, it amounts to a corrigendum noting that the said references have been retracted. However, I am concerned about the additional workload that investigating the impact of retractions could have if we generally adopt the procedure of publishing corrigenda for every article that they affect. An… - Case
Breach of peer review confidentiality
The Forum agreed that breach of confidentiality is a serious matter and should be investigated. As the editor confirmed that the instructions to reviewers in his journal stress the confidentiality of reports, it does appear very likely that reviewer A did breach confidentiality. The editor should contact reviewer A and ask for an explanation. It may be that this was an honest mistake and… - Case
Duplicate publication based on conference proceedings
_ The authors did disclose the other articles so they were partly in the right, and obviously not trying to be deceitful. _ It is also difficult to define as a percentage what constitutes duplication of previously published material, in which case it is difficult to take this any further.… - Case
Dual publication and attempted retraction by the author
An author who published an article in Journal A at the end of the year wrote to advise that it would have to be retracted on the grounds that his PhD tutor, Professor X, had already submitted a similar manuscript more than a year earlier to another journal. In the absence of any contact from the tutor, the author had assumed that this manuscript had not been accepted and went ahead with her… - Case
Editorial misconduct
…there is no satisfactory explanation, the next step could be to contact the society committee, as the journal is owned by a society. The associate editor could ask them to investigate the matter. Other advice was that the journal should formulate a specific policy on conflict of interest so that in the future such issues may not arise.… - Case
Studies where there is no research ethics committee, or where committees disagree as to the need for approval
Researchers who have found no ethics committee willing to accept competence for their study should complain to the NHS. There is a process by which this can occur through the NHS regulatory bodies. The advice was to consult the main ethics website. There is also a list of managers in the contact section. The standard operating procedure document may be helpful ( - Case
Possible plagiarism
…account of COPE’s guidelines and code of conduct under the headings of encouraging integrity of the academic record and pursuing misconduct.. Based on the advice communicated to me, the journal decided to retract the paper and to inform the dean of the author’s institution about this incident. The retraction note has been published online (and will also be printed in the next possible print…