CONCERNS OF DUPLICATE PUBLICATION AND DATA MANIPULATION: SEEKING ETHICAL RESOLUTION
The editors of a journal recently discovered two very similar articles authored by the same individual when cross-referencing Medline for possible redundant publications. The titles of the articles were remarkably similar, differing only in the name of the disease discussed. A closer examination revealed that the abstracts shared almost 50% identical wording, and the control groups for both articles were identical, despite addressing different diseases with distinct prevalence rates.
The editors, concerned about potential data manipulation, explored further and noted that both articles, published more than two years apart, lacked cross-referencing and failed to provide actual values for the measured variables. Instead, only the results of the Mann–Whitney statistical test were presented in the tables. Intrigued and alarmed by these findings, the editors, as colleagues from the same university, wrote to the editors of the two journals housing these articles, seeking clarification. Unfortunately, both journals remained unresponsive to the inquiry.
The editors escalated the matter by reaching out to the head of the institution, outlining the issues and requesting an explanation. In response, the institution head provided a dismissive reply, along with a letter from the authors claiming that they saw no problem as the papers had undergone peer review in respected journals. The authors asserted that the original submission included real numbers, but reviewers insisted on simplifying the tables by excluding the actual values of the measured variables.
Unsatisfied with the response and concerned about the potential breach of ethics, the editors pursued further action. Following COPE guidance, the editor submitted a letter detailing the issues to the journals involved. Despite receiving no response, the editor persisted, seeking reviews from the journals, which were also unresponsive. Recognizing the importance of the issue to the scientific community, the editor approached the National Board for Ethics in Science and Higher Education, seeking advice.
The National Board for Ethics in Science recommended involving the University Ethics Board as the next step after appealing to the deans of the Medical and Dental Schools. The editor is determined to pursue a resolution, emphasizing the significance of maintaining ethical standards in scientific publications and seeking accountability for potential breaches in research integrity.
