Caspian Journal of Dental Research- Scientific Misconduct
Scientific Misconduct

Clear images and colors  | Post date: 2018/07/31 | 
Scientific and Research Misconduct
Scientific and research misconduct includes, but not limited to, data fabrication, data falsification, plagiarism in proposing, performing, and reviewing research. Each of these situations include various situations which must be handled accordingly. When research misconduct is alleged or concern rose about the conduct of a work, we follow well defined procedure established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). the flowchart
( includes how we handle suspected redundant(duplicate) publication, Suspected plagiarism in a submitted/published manuscript, fabricated data, suspected ghost, guest or gift authorship, suspected ethical problem (eg. patient consent, animal experiments) according to COPE recommendation.
During the process of decision making, the editor may publish an expression of concern while pending the outcome. A retraction of the article will be published if the article is proven to include scientific misconduct. However, for the cases in which no misconduct is proven, the letters exchanged by the editor may be published to the readers to demonstrate the matter of debate.
in the cases which a retracted article is published, the original article and its retracted edition must be linked in both directions in all their available forms (Full text, PDF, Abstract). The text must be labeled as “retracted”, and must remain available in public domain.The authors of the retraction should be the same as those of the initial work; however , if not possible, the author will assess the circumstances, and may accept other responsible person. The retraction text must include complete citation, table of content for proper indexing, as well as the reasons for being retracted. The heading and title must be exactly the same as the original paper.
The validity of the previous works and papers already published by an author of a fraudulent paper should be assessed. The editor should ensure about the validity of those works, and retract if needed. If complete assessment and reassurance is not possible, editor may publish an expression of concern, commenting about the uncertain validity of those works.
How do we respond to whistle blowers?
In the cases of anonymous or not anonymous concerns about scientific soundness or allegations of plagiarism, figure manipulation or other forms of misconduct, we follow the process recommended by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Refer to the last section of the document to understand how we respond to the whistle blowers:
(http://Disclosure_of potential_conflicts_of_interest)
Topic URL in Caspian Journal of Dental Research website:
Back to content primary page