Peer-Review fraud - Hacking the scientific publication process

New England Journal of Medicine

Volumn 373, Issue 25, 2015, Pages 2393-2395

  Haug, Charlotte J ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EDITOR; FRAUD; HUMAN; MEDICAL LITERATURE; PEER REVIEW; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PUBLICATION; PUBLISHING; SCIENTIFIC MISCONDUCT; SHORT SURVEY; CHINA; ETHICS; STANDARDS; TRENDS; WRITING;

AUTHORSHIP; CHINA; PEER REVIEW, RESEARCH; PERIODICALS AS TOPIC; PUBLISHING; RETRACTION OF PUBLICATION AS TOPIC; SCIENTIFIC MISCONDUCT;

EID: 84950154046     PISSN: 00284793     EISSN: 15334406     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1056/NEJMp1512330     Document Type: Short Survey

References (5)

1. Retraction of articles from Springer journals. London: Springer, August 18, 2015 (http://www.springer.com/gp/about-springer/media/statements/retraction-of-articles-from-springer-journals/735218).
2. McCook A. 64 More papers retracted for fake reviews, this time from Springer journals. Retraction Watch (http://retractionwatch.com/2015/08/17/64-more-papers-retracted-for-fake-reviews-this-time-from-springer-journals/).
3. Ferguson C, Marcus A, Oransky I. Publishing: The peer-review scam. Nature 2014;515:480-2.
4. Committee on Publication Ethics. COPE statement on inappropriate manipulation of peer review processes (http://publicationethics.org/news/cope-statement-inappropriate-manipulation-peer-review-processes).
5. Hindawi concludes an in-depth investigation into peer review fraud. Hindawi Publishing, July 8, 2015 (http://www.hindawi.com/statement/).