Peer Review Manipulation?

BioMed Central says about 50 manuscripts in its systems may have been erroneously considered or accepted as a result of foul play.

By | November 26, 2014

FLICKR, JJACKOWSKIAbout 50 manuscripts in the open access (OA) publisher BioMed Central’s systems may have not been properly peer reviewed, Retraction Watch reported. The publisher told Retraction Watch suspicious errors—such as misspelled reviewer names and mismatched e-mail addresses—that came up during the final checks on some of the manuscripts caused editors to follow the paper trail, finding evidence to suggest many had been the product of manipulated reviews. “We cannot see a clear link between the authors and believe that a third party may be involved, and influencing the peer review process,” BioMed Central told Retraction Watch.

Earlier this year, SAGE Publishers was caught up in a case of suspected peer review and citation manipulation at its Journal of Vibration and Control. All told, SAGE found that suspected fakers used more than 130 phony e-mail accounts in organized peer review and citation rings. As The Washington Post reported, 60 papers have been retracted as a result of these rigged reviews and references being found out.

Add a Comment

Avatar of: You



Sign In with your LabX Media Group Passport to leave a comment

Not a member? Register Now!

LabX Media Group Passport Logo


November 28, 2014



The culture of biomedical science and training of "our young" needs some serious reconsideration. 

I knew -- far too well -- that cultural problems existed, but this -- THIS -- is a wakeup call. 

Popular Now

  1. Genetic Test Solves Royal Mystery
    Notebook Genetic Test Solves Royal Mystery

    Genetic analyses lay to rest conspiracy theories about death of Belgian King Albert I, who lost his life in a rock climbing accident more than 80 years ago.

  2. Investigation Finds Pathologist Guilty of Systemic Misconduct
  3. Bacteria and Humans Have Been Swapping DNA for Millennia
  4. Opinion: Stop Submitting Papers