Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Brief foray into publication ethics


Published on

Slides I presented at a workshop at World Sleep Congress 2011 in Kyoto

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Brief foray into publication ethics

  1. 1. Key Concepts in Publication Ethics Chris GrafTreasurer, Committee on Publication Ethics Editorial Director, Wiley-Blackwell
  2. 2. -submission-from-2002-in-american-journal-of-psychiatry-earns-an-expression-of-concern/
  3. 3. -researcher-leaves-post-after-rampant-plagiarism-revealed/
  4. 4. -misconduct-by-boston-university-cancer-researcher/
  5. 5. Agenda• Background – Our Guidelines (with detail later) – COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) – Survey of editors, Audit of journals• Key ethical considerations
  6. 6. 2007
  7. 7. Our guidelines• >30 citations• Widely used• Inspired other publishers to act 2007 C, Wager E, Bowman A et al. Int J Clin Pract 2007;61(s152):1–26.doi:10.1111/j.1742-1241.2006.01230.x
  8. 8. 2007All our editors aremembers of COPE
  9. 9. COPE is still a forum: 400 cases
  10. 10. Unethical research Unethical editorial decisions Plagiarism AuthorshipFabrication, falsification
  11. 11. 2008 2009Our ethics survey• “Most editors … seem not very concerned about publication ethics“• We were surprised E, Fiack S, Graf C et al. J Med Ethics 2009;35:348-353.doi:10.1136/jme.2008.028324
  12. 12. Our ethics audit• Step 1• Worked with editors 2009• Harvested information 2010 about their approach to ethics COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) audit tool
  13. 13. Our Audit  Guidance• Step 2• Guidance for editors• Focus: consistently high- quality policies, processes 2010 2011
  14. 14. That’s the background
  15. 15. Detail from guidelines • Our guidelines were written to offer: – Practical advice – Best practice statements – Links to “gold standards”
  16. 16. Key ethical consideration #1• Transparency – Who funded the work? – Who did the work? (Authorship in detail) – Has the work been published before?
  17. 17. Authorship in detail • Authors should meet 1, 2, and 3*: – 1) substantial contributions to conception and design, or acquisition of data, or analysis and interpretation of data; and – 2) drafting the article or revising it critically for important intellectual content; and – 3) final approval of the version to be published*International Committee of Medical Journal of Editors
  18. 18. Authorship in detail• For people who made a contribution but who don’t meet 1 + 2 + 3? – List names and describe contributions – As an “Acknowledgement”
  19. 19. Key ethical consideration #2• Research integrity – Research misconduct – Rights of research participants (eg Informed consent, Privacy) – Respecting cultures and heritage – Informing readers about problems (In detail)
  20. 20. Inform readers about problems • Correction (erratum) for errors in data or information, whatever the cause • “Retraction” if work is proven* fraud – Fabrication, falsification, plagiarism – Publish a statement of retraction, not remove article – *Proven usually by authors’ employer or governing body
  21. 21. Key ethical consideration #3• Editorial standards and processes – Peer review – Appeals – Conflicts of interest (Editors, authors, peer reviewers) – Editorial independence – Accuracy and debate
  22. 22. Conflicts of interest• Editors, authors, peer reviewers• Disclose interests that might appear to affect objectivity• Financial (eg patent ownership, stock ownership, consultancies, speakers fees), personal, political, intellectual, religious
  23. 23. Chris GrafTreasurer, Committee on Publication Ethics Editorial Director, Wiley-Blackwell