Discussions about publication ethics often focus on misconduct by authors such as data fabrication and plagiarism. However, the roles of editors, publishers, academic societies, and research institutions should not be ignored. All these players have ethical responsibilities and should carefully consider the effects of their policies and actions. If people believe that publication ethics is 'somebody else's problem', little progress will be made and problems will persist.
If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.
1. Wager E, Fiack S, Graf C, et al. Science journal editors' views on publication ethics: results of an international survey. Journal of Medical Ethics. 2009; 35: 348-53.
2. Fanelli D. How many scientists fabricate and falsify research? A systematic review and meta-analysis of survey data. PLoS One. 2009; 4(5): e5738.
3. Committee on Publication Ethics (2008). Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors. Available at: http://publicationethics.org/files/Code of conduct for journal editors_0.pdf Accessed 19 July 2012.
4. WAME Policy Statement (2009): The relationship between journal editors-in-chief and owners. Available at: http://www wame org/resources/policies#independence Accessed: June 8, 2011.
5. Smith R. Editor's Choice. BMJ 2004, doi:10.1136/bmj.329.7457.0-g.
6. Graf C, Wager E, Bowman A, et al. Blackwell Publishing guidelines on publication ethics. Int J Clin Pract. 2006; 61 (Suppl 152): 1.26.
7. Wager E. COPE objectives and achievements 1997. 2012. La Presse Medicale. 2012; 41: 861.6.
8. Anonymous. Statement of disputed authorship. British Journal of Obstetrics ' Gynaecology. 2006; 113, i.
9. Smith R. Another editor bites the dust. BMJ. 1999a; 319: 272.
10. Smith R. The firing of Brother George. BMJ. 1999b; 318: 210.
11. Spurgeon D. CMA draws criticism for sacking editors. BMJ. 2006; 332: 503.
12. Fletcher SW, Fletcher RH. Medical editors, journal owners, and the sacking of George Lundberg. Journal of General Internal Medicine. 1999; 14: 200.202.
13. Monbiot G. Academic publishers make Murdoch look like a socialist. The Guardian, 29 August 2011. Available at: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/aug/29/academic-publishers-murdoch-socialist Accessed:19 July 2012.
14. Wager E. Coping with scientific misconduct. BMJ. 2011; 343: d6586.
15. Callaway E. Report finds massive fraud at Dutch universities. Nature. 2011; 479: 15.
16. Marcus A. Japanese anesthesiologist fabricated data in 172 studies. Anesthesiology News July 2, 2012. Available at: http://www.anesthesiologynews.com//ViewArticle. aspx?ses=ogst&d=Web+Exclusives&d_id=175&i=ISSUE%3a+June+2012&i_id=854&a_id=21194 Accessed: July 19, 2012.
17. Sox HC, Rennie D. Research misconduct, retraction, and cleansing the medical literature. Lessons from the Poehlman case. Annals of Internal Medicine. 2006; 144: 609.13.
18. Elia N, Tramer M, Wager E. Fate of articles that warranted retraction due to ethical concerns: a descriptive cross-sectional study. PLOS One. 2014; 9: e85846.
19. Wager E, Kleinert S. Cooperation between research institutions and journals on reseach integrity cases: guidance from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Maturitas. 2012; 72: 165.9.
20. Wager E. Recognition, reward and responsibility: why the authorship of scientific papers matters. Maturitas. 2008; 62: 109.12.
21. Wager E. Do medical journals provide clear and consistent guidelines on authorship? Medscape General Medicine. 2007; 9(3): 16.
22. Shao J, Shen H. The outflow of academic papers from China: why is it happening and can it be stemmed? Learned Publishing. 2011; 24: 95.7.
23. Fauber J. Journal editor gets royalties as articles favor devices. 2010. Available at:www.jsonlinecom/watchdog/watchdogreports/80036277.html Accessed: May 9, 2011.
24. Lenzer J. Journal editor gets $20m in royalties and $2m in fees from device manufacturer. BMJ 2010; 340: c495.
25. Marusi. A, Bates T, Ani. A, Marusi. M. How the structure of contribution disclosure statements affects validity of authorship: a randomized study in a general medical journal. Current Medical Research ' Opinion. 2006; 22(6): 1035.44.
26. Zarin DA, Tse T, Ide NC. Trial registration at ClinicalTrials.gov between May and October 2005. New England Journal of Medicine. 2005; 335: 2779.87.
27. Wager E, Williams P. Hardly “worth the effort”? Medical journals' policies and their editors and publicshers views on trial registration and publication bias: quantitativeand qualitative study. BMJ. 2013; 347: f5248.
28. Kleinert S. Checking for plagiarism, duplicate publication, and text recyling. Lancet. 2011; 377: 281.2.
29. White C. Software makes it easier for journals to spot image manipulation. BMJ. 2007; 334: 607.
30. Rossner M. How to guard against image fraud. The Scientist. March 2006; 24.5.