Debate continues over withdrawn mammography paper
Continuing a debate that started several months ago, The Lancet this month published several linkurl:letters,;http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/section?
Continuing a debate that started several months ago, The Lancet this month published several linkurl:letters,;http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/section?volume=369&issue=9565§ion=Correspondence including one from a publication ethics group, criticizing the linkurl:European Journal of Cancer;http://intl.elsevierhealth.com/journals/ejca/ (EJC)'s decision to quietly withdraw a publication about mammography from its Web site without any explanation. In this latest round of letters the linkurl:Committee on Publication Ethics;http://www.publicationethics.org.uk/ (COPE) weighs in, stating that 'published work--electronically or otherwise--should not be removed without appropriate correction or retraction,' and that the authors were not given due process. COPE's secretary Linda Gough told The Scientist that the EJC is not a member of COPE, but that COPE wrote a letter to EJC inviting the journal to become a member.
The Scientist's Web site has also been host to the linkurl:dispute;http://www.the-scientist.com/news/display/38455/ over whether EJC's decision to remove an article from its Web site without a trace was appropriate. The senior investigator, Peter Gøtzsche, considers the withdrawal to be an abuse urged on by researchers who disagree with his findings, whereas the journal editor defends his decision to remove the article-in-press because of scientific criticisms from reviewers.