Retractions: guidance from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)

RePAIR consensus guidelines: Responsibilities of Publishers, Agencies, Institutions, and Researchers in protecting the integrity of the research record

The progression of research and scholarly inquiry does not occur in isolation and is wholly dependent on accurate reporting of methods and results, and successful replication of prior work. Without mechanisms to correct the literature, much time and money is wasted on research based on a crumbling foundation. These guidelines serve to outline the respective responsibilities of researchers, institutions, agencies, and publishers or editors in maintaining the integrity of the research record. Delineating these complementary roles and proposing solutions for common barriers provide a foundation for best practices.

The ethics of scholarly publishing: exploring differences in plagiarism and duplicate publication across nations

This study explored national differences in plagiarism and duplicate publication in retracted biomedical literature. The national affiliations of authors and reasons for retraction of papers accessible through PubMed that were published from 2008 to 2012 and subsequently retracted were determined in order to identify countries with the largest numbers and highest rates of retraction due to plagiarism and duplicate publication. Authors from more than fifty countries retracted papers. While the United States retracted the most papers, China retracted the most papers for plagiarism and duplicate publication. Rates of plagiarism and duplicate publication were highest in Italy and Finland, respectively. Unethical publishing practices cut across nations.

Cooperation between research institutions and journals on research integrity cases: guidance from the committee on publication ethics (cope)

Institutions and journals both have important duties relating to research and publication misconduct. Institutions are responsible for the conduct of their researchers and for encouraging a healthy research environment. Journals are responsible for the conduct of their editors, for safeguarding the research record, and for ensuring the reliability of everything they publish. It is therefore important for institutions and journals to communicate and collaborate effectively on cases relating to research integrity. To achieve this, we make the following recommendations. Institutions should: have a research integrity officer (or office) and publish their contact details prominently; inform journals about cases of proven misconduct that affect the reliability or attribution of work that they have published; respond to journals if they request information about issues, such as disputed authorship, misleading reporting, competing interests, or other factors, including honest errors, that could affect the reliability of published work; initiate inquiries into allegations of research misconduct or unacceptable publication practice raised by journals; have policies supporting responsible research conduct and systems in place for investigating suspected research misconduct.Journals should: publish the contact details of their editor-in-chief who should act as the point of contact for questions relating to research and publication integrity; inform institutions if they suspect misconduct by their researchers, and provide evidence to support these concerns; cooperate with investigations and respond to institutions' questions about misconduct allegations; be prepared to issue retractions or corrections (according to the COP E guidelines on retractions) when provided with findings of misconduct arising from investigations; have policies for responding to institutions and other organizations that investigate cases of research misconduct.

Retracted science and the retraction index

Articles may be retracted when their findings are no longer considered trustworthy due to scientific misconduct or error, they plagiarize previously published work, or they are found to violate ethical guidelines. Using a novel measure that we call the "retraction index," we found that the frequency of retraction varies among journals and shows a strong correlation with the journal impact factor. Although retractions are relatively rare, the retraction process is essential for correcting the literature and maintaining trust in the scientific process.