COPE's retraction guidelines

Abstract

Editors have a duty to maintain the integrity of the scientific record. “Whenever it is recognised that a significant inaccuracy, misleading statement or distorted report has been published, it must be corrected promptly and with due prominence. If, after an appropriate investigation, an item proves to be fraudulent, it should be retracted.” 1 COPECode of conduct. http://publicationethics.org/files/u2/New_Code.pdf Google Scholar So states the Code of Conduct that all members of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) should follow. Yet, editors are sometimes reluctant, 2 Sox HC Rennie D Research misconduct, retraction, and cleansing the medical literature: lessons from the Poehlman case. Ann Intern Med. 2006; 144: 609-613 Crossref PubMed Scopus (171) Google Scholar they might encounter barriers by institutions or authorities to conduct a fair and speedy investigation with publicly available results, and there is a diversity of approach in how and why articles are retracted. 3 Atlas MC Retraction policies of high-impact biomedical journals. J Med Libr Assoc. 2004; 92: 242-250 PubMed Google Scholar In a 2004 analysis, very few of 122 journals had a retraction policy. 3 Atlas MC Retraction policies of high-impact biomedical journals. J Med Libr Assoc. 2004; 92: 242-250 PubMed Google Scholar Elizabeth Wager and Peter Williams presented an analysis of 312 retractions from 1988 to 2008 at the Peer Review Congress in Vancouver, BC, Canada, earlier this year (Wager E, Princes Risborough, Buckinghamshire, UK; personal communication). Reasons for retraction were: fabrication (5%), falsification (4%), plagiarism (16%), redundant publication (17%), disputed authorship or data ownership (5%), inaccurate or misleading reporting (4%), honest research errors (28%), non-replicable findings (11%), and not stated (9%). So at least 42%, likely more, were due to misconduct. In an earlier analysis, 4 Nath SB Marcus SC Druss BG Retractions in the research literature: misconduct or mistakes?. Med J Aust. 2006; 185: 152-154 PubMed Google Scholar 27% of 395 articles were retracted because of scientific misconduct.