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 As The Washington Post reported, 60 papers have been retracted as a result of these rigged reviews and references being found out.

Advertisement

Add a Comment

Avatar of: You

You

Processing...
Processing...

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

Not a member? Register Now!

LabX Media Group Passport Logo

Comments

November 28, 2014

 

Wow. 

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. Mapping the Human Connectome
    Daily News Mapping the Human Connectome

    A new map of human cortex combines data from multiple imaging modalities and comprises 180 distinct regions.

  2. Will Organs-in-a-Dish Ever Replace Animal Models?
  3. Your Office Has a Distinct Microbiome
  4. Neurons Compete to Form Memories
RayBiotech