Retractions: guidance from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)
- PMID: 20017220
- PMCID: PMC2802086
- DOI: 10.3325/cmj.2009.50.532
Retractions: guidance from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)
Abstract
Journal editors should consider retracting a publication if:
• they have clear evidence that the findings are unreliable, either as a result of misconduct (eg, data fabrication) or honest error (eg, miscalculation or experimental error)
• the findings have previously been published elsewhere without proper cross-referencing, permission or justification (ie, cases of redundant publication)
• it constitutes plagiarism
• it reports unethical research
Journal editors should consider issuing an expression of concern if:
• they receive inconclusive evidence of research or publication misconduct by the authors
• there is evidence that the findings are unreliable but the authors’ institution will not investigate the case
• they believe that an investigation into alleged misconduct related to the publication either has not been, or would not be, fair and impartial or conclusive
• an investigation is under way but a judgement will not be available for a considerable time
Journal editors should consider issuing a correction if:
• a small portion of an otherwise reliable publication proves to be misleading (especially because of honest error)
• the author / contributor list is incorrect (ie, a deserving author has been omitted or somebody who does not meet authorship criteria has been included)
Retractions are
• a change of authorship is required but there is no reason to doubt the validity of the findings
Notices of retraction should:
• be linked to the retracted article wherever possible (ie, in all electronic versions)
• clearly identify the retracted article (eg, by including the title and authors in the retraction heading)
• be clearly identified as a retraction (ie, distinct from other types of correction or comment)
• be published promptly to minimize harmful effects from misleading publications
• be freely available to all readers (ie, not behind access barriers or available only to subscribers)
• state who is retracting the article
• state the reason(s) for retraction (to distinguish misconduct from honest error)
• avoid statements that are potentially defamatory or libellous
Similar articles
-
Ensuring the integrity of the published record: Croatian Medical Journal endorses guidance on retractions in scientific journals by Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).Croat Med J. 2009 Dec;50(6):531. doi: 10.3325/cmj.2009.50.531. Croat Med J. 2009. PMID: 20017219 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
-
Retractions: guidance from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).Obes Rev. 2010 Jan;11(1):64-6. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-789X.2009.00702.x. Obes Rev. 2010. PMID: 20653849 No abstract available.
-
Retractions: Guidance from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).Maturitas. 2009 Dec 20;64(4):201-3. doi: 10.1016/j.maturitas.2009.09.018. Maturitas. 2009. PMID: 19954902 No abstract available.
-
Retractions: trends, implications, and possible further steps.Eur J Phys Rehabil Med. 2012 Jun;48(2):339-43. Eur J Phys Rehabil Med. 2012. PMID: 22614895 Review. No abstract available.
-
Retractions in Rehabilitation and Sport Sciences Journals: A Systematic Review.Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2020 Nov;101(11):1980-1990. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2020.03.010. Epub 2020 May 10. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2020. PMID: 32402503
Cited by
-
Recent trends: Retractions of articles in the oncology field.Heliyon. 2024 Jun 14;10(12):e33007. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e33007. eCollection 2024 Jun 30. Heliyon. 2024. PMID: 38984306 Free PMC article.
-
Self-correction in biomedical publications and the scientific impact.Croat Med J. 2014 Feb;55(1):61-72. doi: 10.3325/cmj.2014.55.61. Croat Med J. 2014. PMID: 24577829 Free PMC article.
-
Perpetuation of Retracted Publications Using the Example of the Scott S. Reuben Case: Incidences, Reasons and Possible Improvements.Sci Eng Ethics. 2016 Aug;22(4):1063-1072. doi: 10.1007/s11948-015-9680-y. Epub 2015 Jul 7. Sci Eng Ethics. 2016. PMID: 26150092
-
The undeclared use of third-party service providers in academic publishing is unethical: an epistemic reflection and scoping review.Naunyn Schmiedebergs Arch Pharmacol. 2024 Dec;397(12):9435-9447. doi: 10.1007/s00210-024-03177-6. Epub 2024 Jul 11. Naunyn Schmiedebergs Arch Pharmacol. 2024. PMID: 38990307 Free PMC article.
-
Incorrectly Labeled Randomized Study and Inappropriate Within-Group Comparisons in: "Effectiveness of Home Gardening in Improving Food Security and Health in Chacraseca, Nicaragua: A Pilot Study".J Health Care Poor Underserved. 2023 Feb;34(1):510-512. doi: 10.1353/hpu.2023.0035. J Health Care Poor Underserved. 2023. PMID: 37415952 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources