第六年医学生，预计2013年毕业年份（X先生），将于2012年2月至2012年10月至2012年至2012年10月提交了29篇原章和17封信。这相当于每月五次提交。X先生是每篇文章中的作者和相应的作者。其中，他是八个原始研究文章和12个字母的第一作者。在其余的人中，他是一个合作者。文章是非常多样化的科目。
这让我们认为，除了他的临床工作和研究外，他如何有时间进行研究，分析结果并写下文章。
期刊首先写信给X先生的必要理由。他及时回应，“我是我国最好的研究人员之一，在每个医学领域都有多种出版物，并赢得了多个奖品”。他为他的信贷提供了72个出版物的清单。他还提供了大学研究委员会主任的姓名和电子邮件。
We wrote to the concerned parties asking them to endorse the submissions as being ethical and valid for the purpose of publication. The chief replied that Mr X was a member of the student research committee with some research background in medicine which led to multiple awards and publications. He confirmed the research background in a vague manner and there were no more comments or endorsements of the submitted articles.
We then wrote to the vice chancellor of the university asking for verification and endorsement of the articles according to the ICMJE guidelines. The director of research affairs was also approached, who asked for details of all the articles submitted. These were duly sent.
与此同时，X先生联系我们指出他的电子邮件被黑客攻击，别人已经用他的名字发了信和文章。这是不正确的，因为所有邮件都有相同的电子邮件地址。我们还于2013年3月6日发送了一封电子邮件给我国的出版委员会。没有回应。
We face a dilemma. The articles are lying unprocessed. It is a mystery as to why the higher authorities are not taking any action or replying to our emails.
问题
COPE论坛会建议我们做什么？
The Forum suggested that it may be useful in this case to help rather than punish the author. As an initial approach, the Forum asked if there was any pastoral care available to the student, or whether the medical school has anyone who could talk to the student in a confidential manner. This may be more of a problem with the student, rather than research integrity concerns. The institution has a responsibility to its students and they need to ensure that students are sufficiently supported. So the editor should consider contacting someone in this role at the author’s university.
However, that still leaves the dilemma of the unprocessed articles and what to do with them. The Forum advised that the editor needs to be certain that the articles are all from the author and that he takes responsibility for them. If there is any doubt, then the articles should not be processed. However, if the articles are genuine and have scientific merit, then they should be processed in the normal way, as there are no grounds for rejection.
论坛还建议联系any co-authors on the papers for an explanation and to confirm that the papers have all been written by the author. The editor should make it clear to the author that the papers are on hold while the issue is satisfactorily resolved.
另一个建议是为编辑考虑联系一些更高权力或监管机构，或研究部，并要求他们调查此案。
As suggested by the Forum members, we did some investigations ourselves as the higher authorities, including the Vice Chancellor of the University to which the author belonged, were unresponsive.
作为样本，为三篇文章进行了互联网搜索。发现一个人从另一个在线日记中的类似文章中全面复制。
搜索是针对同框的正确名称和电子邮件地址进行了搜索，因为提交给我们的文章中所述的那些是错误的。我们通过电话与两名同框交谈 - 一个人对有关作者一无所知，或者他的名字被列为共同构。他也对这篇文章一无所知。另一个高级同志讲述了作者。他说，“X先生是一个非常聪明和知识渊博的研究人员，并写得很好”。他无法证明X先生可以在这种多样化的主题上写作。
我们只收到了一位高级教授的一封电子邮件回复。他写道：“我真的很震惊地看到没有我的知识发表的论文。我不知道X先生（作者）。我从未见过他。他从未和我一起工作过。他偷了我发布的数据。我要将这条信息转发给道德部门，并对大学有关人士提出投诉“。
We have had no comment or reply to our queries from the officials of the university. From the Internet searches made by us, we can conclude that Mr X, the medical student (author) is:
• Not only good at writing in English but is also excellent in fabricating and stealing data.
•他有一个或两个大学的一个或两个高级教师的支持。
• He has been committing these unethical acts for quite a few years as there are a number of articles with his name.
• The articles submitted to our journal had fake email addresses and names, even with incorrect spellings, making contact difficult.
•所有作者的签名都是伪造的。
对应对论坛的问题
（1）我们应该关闭所有文件并埋葬案例吗？
（2）如果没有，应该采取哪些步骤？
One view from the Forum was that, as suggested before, the editor should contact a higher authority, regulatory body, or ministry of research, and ask them to investigate the case, given the institution’s unwillingness or inability to engage with the editor on this issue.
然而，其他人认为这是该机构的责任来处理这一学生。
没有响应编辑要求的机构是一个常见的问题，建议是每3个月联系机构，要求答复并包括关于案件的信息副本。编辑应该说他/她不认为此事已关闭并要求该机构调查此案。如果机构确实同意调查，编辑应使用该机构报告中的案文发布期刊调查的调查结果。
论坛建议编辑不接受本作者的任何文件。编辑应该写信给提交的稿件的所有作者，说这名学生中没有进一步的论文。
关于发布的文件，编辑应考虑联系本作者公布论文的其他期刊的编辑。
更新（2013年12月）：
The Secretary National Ethics Committee updated the editor that the university was conducting an investigation. The Committee have confirmed that more misconducts had been detected against this author and the concerned authorities were still looking into the case. The Committee suggested that the journal should take an independent decision on the unprocessed articles in the journal’s office. The journal plans to make a final decision on the pending articles very soon.
更新（2014年2月）：
The Secretary National Ethics Committee told the editor that more misconduct cases had been detected against this author and the concerned authorities were still looking into the case. He suggested that the journal should take an independent decision on the unprocessed articles. We will make a final decision on the pending articles shortly.
Update (June 2014):
我们的期刊编辑委员会的决定是将所有27个待定文件置于欺诈之下。该决定也被采取措施淘汰作者。作者大学国家研究伦理委员会获奖。
注释
有一个巨大的信息技术错误是这个故事：
“与此同时，X先生联系我们指出他的电子邮件被黑了攻击，别人已经用他的名字发了信件和物品。这是不正确的，因为所有邮件都有相同的电子邮件地址。”
Hacking an e-mail address means illicit use by someone other than the righful owner. Such hacking cannot be simply detected by looking at the address. It is a common form internet crime to hack soemone's address and send messages to those in the address books and ask for sending money in order to help in an emergency. In such a case, making contact with the author in some way other than e-mail is usually necessary.