You are here

知识产权

All policies on intellectual property, including copyright and publishing licenses, should be clearly described. In addition, any costs associated with publishing should be obvious to authors and readers. Policies should be clear on what counts as prepublication that will preclude consideration. What constitutes plagiarism and redundant/overlapping publication should be specified

我们的核心实践

政策和pra核心实践ctices journals and publishers need, to reach the highest standards in publication ethics. We include cases with advice, guidance for day-to-day practice, education modules and events on topical issues, to support journals and publishers fulfil their policies.
Case

Attempt at multiple plagiarism

04-15

In January 2004 a submission was made to Journal A from a laboratory in a different country. In April 2004 it was bought to the editor’s attention that the manuscript was a verbatim copy of a paper published in 2003 in another journal, Journal B. The only difference between the manuscripts was that the names and affiliations of the authors on the second paper were different to the first paper.

Case

Attempts to draw attention to potential duplicate publication

04-06

A medical student brought a case of duplicate publication in two journals in the same specialty to the attention of an editor of a third journal. The article in Journal A was published in 1997 and the article in Journal B was published in 1999. The editor wrote to both journals and asked them to investigate. The editor wrote several times over two years before he retired.

Case

Dual publication and attempted retraction by the author

04-05

An author who published an article in Journal A at the end of the year wrote to advise that it would have to be retracted on the grounds that his PhD tutor, Professor X, had already submitted a similar manuscript more than a year earlier to another journal. In the absence of any contact from the tutor, the author had assumed that this manuscript had not been accepted and went ahead with her own submission.

Case

Wholesale plagiarism

04-04

一篇审查文章由三位单独机构的三位作者提交给A的Journal A.它被派遣到两名裁判员。其中一个裁判员注意到一项表观相似性与审查在B期刊上发表的一年,但由两个完全不同的作者写作。

Case

抄袭和可能的欺诈性出版物

03-22

杰出的公共利益主题撰写的一篇文章,具有对公共卫生政策的影响,在A期刊A中发表。他们随后写信给A杂志,表明一篇文章在B期刊上发表了一篇文章,这些文章大量抄袭了他们的杂志。Junice A编辑写信给第二篇论文的作者,但没有收到令人满意的回复。

Case

抄袭和可能的欺诈

03-16

The authors of a paper published in another journal wrote to the editor of Journal A, complaining of apparent blatant plagiarism of their work by N et al. , whose paper had been published in the journal earlier in the year. Further investigation revealed that the text of the two papers was almost identical. S et al. had used one drug and N et al. had used a different one of the same class. The published results in the second paper closely matched those of the first.

Case

Attempted plagiarism of a published report

03-13

A review paper covering the prevention of a certain type of infection was submitted to Journal A. One of the reviewers identified that the paper was based word for word on a report that had published guidelines on the same area. The authors of both pieces are different. The only significant differences between the submission and the original paper were in the introduction and conclusion.

Case

广泛的抄袭

03-11

2003年期刊A发表的文章包含了2001年期刊B杂志上发布的文章的广泛逐字未分配的报价。编辑要求编辑团队成员按行进行比较,似乎似乎是一个没有任何引用的高重叠,没有任何关于Journal B的原始文章。文章的作者和期刊A的编辑被要求解释。

Case

未经授权使用问卷

03-05

一份期刊有两份发病项,其中在未经调查问卷发起者许可的情况下使用调查问卷。这两个手稿起源于不同的国家,并使用不同的问卷。1.提交了一份稿件,以解决了生活质量问题。裁判对数据和方法有各种担忧,并邀请作者修改稿件。

Case

可能的抄袭和制造

03-01

A group of six authors published a study in a peer reviewed journal, comparing the efficacy of the same class of two drugs (A and B) with a placebo and with each other. One year later the lead author of that study was searching in Medline for new evidence on the efficacy of drug A and found a study that had been published in another peer reviewed journal the year after his by three authors from another country.

Pages