SERIAL PLAGIARISM: 11 MANUSCRIPTS UNDER SCRUTINY FROM A SINGLE CORRESPONDING AUTHOR
In a startling revelation, an academic journal recently uncovered a concerning trend of plagiarism involving 11 manuscripts submitted within a single month. The manuscripts, comprising 9 case reports, 1 original study, and 1 letter, all originated from an author based in a European Union country, identified as author A, who also served as the first author in each submission. Another author, identified as author B, appeared as the second author in 10 of the manuscripts, while two additional authors (authors C and D) were listed in two of the submissions.
Alarming findings emerged during the editorial review process, with four manuscripts (1, 5, 6, and 8) being rejected due to lack of originality. Further investigation revealed that manuscript 10, currently under review, exhibited a striking 97% similarity index with a previously published article, raising serious concerns about academic integrity. Shockingly, the editor in chief uncovered blatant plagiarism in several submissions, including verbatim text from rejected manuscripts (1, 5, and 8), as well as manuscript 2 under review, comprising 50–94% of the related content. Additionally, manuscripts 6 and 9 were found to be direct duplicates of previously published articles, with author A featuring as a common author.
In response to these egregious ethical violations, the editor in chief has suspended the review process for all 11 manuscripts pending further resolution. Furthermore, proactive measures are underway to notify the respective institutions of the author and coauthors, with a proposal to suspend further submissions from author A for a minimum of 5 years.
While maintaining an obligation to evaluate each manuscript on its own merits, the editor acknowledges the gravity of the situation and emphasizes the importance of thorough scrutiny. Collaborating with COPE guidelines, the editor refrains from outright banning authors for ethical transgressions but underscores the necessity for stringent plagiarism checks prior to commencing the review process.
Given the author's residency status, prompt intervention from their institutions is imperative to address and rectify such unethical conduct. It is crucial to curb these unethical practices at their source to uphold academic integrity and prevent their proliferation in the competitive scholarly landscape.
