Difference between revisions of "Resource:D37d8de4-899e-458c-aa5d-c0246286dd0f"
From The Embassy of Good Science
Marc.VanHoof (talk | contribs) |
|||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
|Resource Type=Cases | |Resource Type=Cases | ||
|Title=Organised Crime Against the Academic Peer Review System | |Title=Organised Crime Against the Academic Peer Review System | ||
| − | |Is About= | + | |Is About=This case describes an instance of fake peer reviewing by a company that was hired by the authors of the paper to submit the paper. They suggested two high profile reviewers upon submission, that turned out to be fake. After discovery of this practice, the paper was retracted from the journal. |
| + | |Important Because=Fake peer reviewing allows researchers to circumvent the scientific journal review system that is in place to ensure quality of the publication. Serious consequences may follow if this quality control step is skipped. For instance, the meta-analysis in this case claims the opposite of the widely considered beliefs about the treatment in question. If clinicians base their treatments based on such a meta-analysis, substantial harm to patients could be done. Therefore, it is important to recognize certain red flags for fake peer reviews in the peer review system. <ref>Ferguson, C., Marcus, A., & Oransky, I. (2014). Publishing: The peer-review scam. ''Nature News'', ''515''(7528), 480. https://www.nature.com/news/publishing-the-peer-review-scam-1.16400</ref> | ||
|Important For=Editors; Peer reviewers | |Important For=Editors; Peer reviewers | ||
}} | }} | ||
| Line 9: | Line 10: | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{Related To | {{Related To | ||
| − | |Related To Theme=Theme:29d64b53-eba2-489b-937d-440d6cd118d8 | + | |Related To Theme=Theme:29d64b53-eba2-489b-937d-440d6cd118d8;Theme:Fb1a2e2a-aa2a-4eb4-ac9c-c9567c2b401b |
}} | }} | ||
{{Tags | {{Tags | ||
| + | |Has Timepoint=2016 | ||
| + | |Has Location=England | ||
| + | |Has Virtue And Value=Honesty; Integrity; Responsibility | ||
|Has Good Practice And Misconduct=Publication ethics | |Has Good Practice And Misconduct=Publication ethics | ||
| + | |Related To Research Area=LS 07.03 - Pharmacology, pharmacogenomics, drug discovery and design, drug therapy | ||
}} | }} | ||
Revision as of 17:46, 20 May 2021
ResourcesCases
Organised Crime Against the Academic Peer Review System
What is this about?
This case describes an instance of fake peer reviewing by a company that was hired by the authors of the paper to submit the paper. They suggested two high profile reviewers upon submission, that turned out to be fake. After discovery of this practice, the paper was retracted from the journal.
Why is this important?
Fake peer reviewing allows researchers to circumvent the scientific journal review system that is in place to ensure quality of the publication. Serious consequences may follow if this quality control step is skipped. For instance, the meta-analysis in this case claims the opposite of the widely considered beliefs about the treatment in question. If clinicians base their treatments based on such a meta-analysis, substantial harm to patients could be done. Therefore, it is important to recognize certain red flags for fake peer reviews in the peer review system. [1]
For whom is this important?
Other information
When
Where
Virtues & Values
Good Practices & Misconduct
- ↑ Ferguson, C., Marcus, A., & Oransky, I. (2014). Publishing: The peer-review scam. Nature News, 515(7528), 480. https://www.nature.com/news/publishing-the-peer-review-scam-1.16400
