How to improve assessments of publication integrity

2024/07/29 by Andrew Grey, Alison Avenell, A. A. Klein +3 · 1 voice · 2 citations
Social Sciences · Medicine · #Academic integrity and plagiarism #Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education #Ethics in Clinical Research

paper · pdf · doi:10.1038/d41586-024-02449-8

openalex publication_date 2024/07/29 · openalex created_date 2024/07/31 · openalex updated_date 2026/07/30

Abstract

Too often, journal assessments of potentially unreliable research are superficial, opaque and prolonged. Changes to the guidance given by the Committee on Publication Ethics could tighten up the process. Too often, journal assessments of potentially unreliable research are superficial, opaque and prolonged. Changes to the guidance given by the Committee on Publication Ethics could tighten up the process.

Cited by

• Ranking-based sanctions for retraction-afflicted elite researchers
• Reckoning with Retractions in Research Funding Reviews: The Case of China

Discussions

• "We think that it’s too easy for journals and publishers to claim that they have followed COPE guidance, when — in our view — they have only paid lip service to publication integrity while sidesteppin [bsky, 4 points, 0 comments]

Related

• Enhancing Research Methodology and Academic Publishing: A Structured Framework for Quality and Integrity
• Trends in research integrity concerns and the evolving role of the publisher
• Quality and Peer Review of Research: An Adjudicating Role for Editors
• Distinguishing articles in questionable and non-questionable journals using quantitative indicators associated with quality
• Publishers’ responses to integrity concerns – does the type of notice influence subsequent citations? A cohort study