Seven Plagiarized Manuscripts in One Month by the Same Corresponding Author
Over the span of a single month, our journal received 11 manuscripts from authors based in a European Union country. What's notable is that all 11 manuscripts shared a commonality—they were submitted by the same corresponding author, who also served as the first author for each manuscript. Furthermore, in 10 of these manuscripts, a second author appeared, while two additional authors were involved in two of the manuscripts.
Regrettably, our editorial review process uncovered significant ethical breaches. Four of the submitted manuscripts (1, 5, 6, and 8) were swiftly rejected due to lack of originality. An additional manuscript (10), which had undergone peer review, was flagged for plagiarism, with a staggering 97% similarity index to a previously published article. Upon scrutiny, it was evident that the author had merely altered the author names, despite asserting originality in the cover letter.
Further investigation revealed that three of the rejected manuscripts (1, 5, and 8), along with another under review (2), contained verbatim text copied from related manuscripts, accounting for 50–94% of the content. Manuscripts 6 and 9 were outright duplications from previously published articles, in which the offending author was a common contributor.
Given the gravity of these infractions, the editor-in-chief has rightfully suspended the review process for all 11 manuscripts pending resolution. Moreover, it has been proposed to reach out to the respective institutions of the authors involved, with a recommendation to halt future submissions from the principal author for a minimum of 5 years.
While the obligation to evaluate each manuscript individually remains paramount, the recurring pattern of misconduct warrants diligent scrutiny. Going forward, preemptive plagiarism checks for all submissions may serve as a proactive measure to uphold scholarly integrity.
Furthermore, intervention at the institutional level is imperative, especially considering the offending author's status as a resident. Addressing these ethical lapses early is vital to prevent such behavior from proliferating, particularly in environments where academic pressures may incentivize shortcut tactics.
Ultimately, our commitment to maintaining the highest ethical standards in scholarly publishing necessitates swift and decisive action in response to misconduct, ensuring the integrity of our academic community remains uncompromised.
