Volume 25, Issue 4 - Medical Education

Peer review fraud

Author: Stephen Gilliver

Abstract

Download the full article

References

1. Ferguson C, Marcus A, Oransky I. Publishing: The peer-review scam. Nature. 2014;515(7528):480-2.
2. Haug CJ. Peer-review fraud—Hacking the scientific publication process. N Engl J Med. 2015;373(25):2393-5.
3. McCook A. Retraction Watch. What pub - lishers and countries do most retractions for fake peer review come from? 2016 [cited 2016 Oct 12]. Available from: http://retractionwatch.com/2016/09/27/what-publishers-and-countries-do-mostretractions-for-fake-peer-review-comefrom/
4. Cohen A, Pattanaik S, Kumar P, Bies RR, de Boer A, Ferro A, et al. Organised crime against the academic peer review system. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2016;81(6):1012-7.
5. Lv MY, Deng SL, Long XF. Retraction. rhBNP therapy can improve clinical outcomes and reduce in-hospital mortality compared with dobutamine in heart failure patients: a meta-analysis. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2016;81(1):174-85.
6. No authors listed. Retraction: ‘rhBNP therapy can improve clinical outcomes and reduce in-hospital mortality compared with dobutamine in heart failure patients: a metaanalysis’ by Ming-Yi Lv, Shu-Ling Deng and Xiao-Feng Long. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2016;81(5):1005.
7. Wager E, Barbour V, Yentis S, Kleinert S, on behalf of COPE Council. Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Guidelines for retracting articles. 2009 [cited 2016 Oct 12]. Available from: http://publicationethics.org/files/retraction%20guidelines.pdf