Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2019 Sep 2:4:17.
doi: 10.1186/s41073-019-0077-3. eCollection 2019.

A 10-year follow up of publishing ethics in China: what is new and what is unchanged

Affiliations

A 10-year follow up of publishing ethics in China: what is new and what is unchanged

Katrina A Bramstedt et al. Res Integr Peer Rev. .

Abstract

Background: Organ donation and transplantation in China are ethically complex due to questionable informed consent and the use of prisoners as donors. Publishing works from China can be problematic. The objective of this study was to perform a 10-year follow up on Chinese journals active in donation and transplant publishing regarding the evolution of their publishing guidelines.

Methods: Eleven Chinese journals were analyzed for 7 properties: (1) ethics committee approval; (2) procedure consent; (3) publishing consent; (4) authorship criteria; (5) conflict of interest; (6) duplicate publication; and (7) data integrity. Results were compared with our 2008 study data. Additionally, open access status, impact factor, and MEDLINE-indexing were explored.

Results: Most journals heightened the ethical requirements for publishing, compared to the results of 2008. All 11 now require their published manuscripts to have data integrity. Ten of 11 require ethics committee approval and informed consent for the publication of research studies, whereas in the original study only 2 journals evidenced these requirements. Nine of 11 have criteria for authorship, require conflict of interest disclosure, and forbid duplicate publishing. None of the journals have a policy to exclude data that was obtained from unethical organ donation practices. Nine of 11 journals are MEDLINE-indexed but only 2 are open-access.

Conclusions: Most journals have improved their general ethical publishing requirements but none address unethical organ donation practices.

Keywords: China; Informed consent; Organ donation; Publishing; Research ethics; Research integrity.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interestsThe authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Similar articles

References

    1. Bramstedt KA, China XJ. A case study regarding transplant publishing issues. J Infor Ethics. 2008;17(2):12–22. doi: 10.3172/JIE.17.2.12.. - DOI
    1. Matas D, Kilgour D. Bloody Harvest: Revised Report into Allegations of Organ Harvesting of Falun Gong Practitioners in China. 2007.
    1. International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. Recommendations for the conduct, reporting, editing, and publication of scholarly work in medical journals. 2107. http://www.icmje.org/icmje-recommendations.pdf. Accessed 10 Dec 2018. - PubMed
    1. Amos KA. The ethics of scholarly publishing: exploring differences in plagiarism and duplicate publication across nations. J Med Libr Assoc. 2014;102(2):87–91. doi: 10.3163/1536-5050.102.2.005. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Clarivate Analytics . 2018 journal citation reports. London: Clarivate Analytics; 2012.

LinkOut - more resources