CASE OF REDUNDANT PUBLICATION: ADDRESSING OVERSIGHT AND NON-DISCLOSURE
In a recent case, a paper submitted to Journal A as a rapid communication raised concerns of redundant publication when it was discovered that similar findings from the same patient cohort had been published concurrently in a major US journal within the specialty. Despite the closely related yet distinct messages of the two papers, the authors failed to acknowledge the overlap, prompting scrutiny from the editorial board.
Upon further investigation, it was revealed that a subsequent submission to Journal A also utilized samples from the previously published patient cohort, yet again without acknowledgment. The senior author's response citing oversight and a proforma submission letter raised concerns about transparency and disclosure.
COPE advises that while using the same samples for different assays is permissible, transparency is paramount. Authors should explicitly disclose any overlap or reuse of data to avoid ambiguity and maintain scholarly integrity. In cases of non-disclosure, it is imperative to inform the head of the author's institution.
Moving forward, a statement of redundancy should be published in all affected journals to rectify the oversight and ensure transparency. Editorial responses across journals should be consistent to uphold ethical standards and address the issue comprehensively.
By adhering to principles of transparency and disclosure, authors and editors alike uphold the integrity of scholarly research and foster trust within the academic community.
