Fertility and Sterility has censured the authors of a 2005 article after learning a Korean journal had published the identical paper one year earlier. The Fertility and Sterility authors also left off the name of Jeong-Hwan Kim, who was listed as the first author on the Korean paper and performed the bulk of the research reported in both papers.
The journal plans to update its database and national databases such as MEDLINE, adding the name of Kim as the first author of the study, which described the use of polymerase chain reaction (PCR) to measure mitochondrial DNA in women with premature ovarian failure.
The journal will also issue a note in an upcoming issue describing the transgression, and has barred every author listed on the original Fertility and Sterility paper from contributing papers to the journal for three years, editor Alan DeCherney told The Scientist. "This is a serious punishment."
Every author signed a statement saying they had not published the paper in another journal, and had no plans to do so. "So they perjured themselves," DeCherney noted, adding the incident was a "blight on the field."
This story was first reported by the Los Angeles Times.
At his request, the Korean Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology sent DeCherney a translated copy of the paper they published, which was "pretty much" identical to the Fertility and Sterility paper. The Korean article contained slight differences in wording that likely stemmed from the translation, DeCherney noted.
He said he had no plans to retract the article, since no one was questioning the validity of the science. If the paper is retracted, "the only person who will be hurt is Dr. Kim," who wouldn't get credit for his research, DeCherney noted.
He added that the journal learned last summer that the paper had been plagiarized, but waited to act on the information until it confirmed the role Kim had played in the research. Last Monday (Feb 12), the editorial board of the Korean Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology told DeCherney they had reviewed the evidence and confirmed that Kim had played a significant enough role to designate him as the first author of the Fertility and Sterility paper. "If it was a very important paper with clinical implications, I would have acted differently" and sped up the process, said DeCherney. "It's much more important that we be careful," and take the time to thoroughly review the claims, he added.
Neither the first nor the corresponding authors of the Fertility and Sterility paper -- Kwang-Yul Cha and Sook-Hwan Lee, respectively -- responded to requests for comment. Lee is also listed as an author on the Korean Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology paper.
Lee told the Los Angeles Times that she did the work published in Fertility and Sterility, and the authors left off Kim's name because they couldn't reach him. "This was the outcome of the work done at my laboratory... Dr. Kim was one of the researchers and was involved in the project on a very limited scale," Lee said in an Email to the Times.
In an interview with The Scientist, Kim said he was easy to find, even after he left the Cha Hospital in Korea for the National University Hospital in Singapore. "Everyone knew where I was, everyone knew where I was going." Plus, Kim's new job was in a lab headed by an aquaintance of the first author of the Fertility and Sterility paper, Kwang-Yul Cha.
Kim said he contacted the Fertility and Sterility board when he saw the journal had published a translated version of the Korean paper, which is based on his PhD thesis, and lists him as the first author. He said he supplied all of the raw data for both papers, and Cha et al "have done nothing."
Cha is no stranger to controversy -- in 2001, he co-authored an article in the Journal of Reproductive Medicine that showed prayer from strangers boosted the success of couples undergoing in vitro fertilization. After questions emerged about the paper's validity, the lead author withdrew his name, but the journal has not retracted it.
Alison McCook
mail@the-scientist.com
Editor's note (posted June 8): In a letter dated May 31, 2007, Alan DeCherney asked to retract the comments he made to The Scientist for this article. For more details, see our in-depth coverage posted June 8, 2007.
Links within this article
KY Cha et al, "Quantification of mitochondrial DNA using real-time polymerase chain reaction in patients with premature ovarian failure," Fertility and Sterility, December 2005.
http://www.the-scientist.com/pubmed/16359970
Alan DeCherney
http://www.ccpe.com/800-995-6555/faculty/decherney.html
Fertility and Sterility author instructions
http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/600420/authorinstructions
C. Ornstein, "Credit for US journal article at issue," Los Angeles Times, February 18, 2007.
http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/california/la-me-research18feb18,1,2222823.story?coll=la-headlines-pe-california
KY Cha and DP Wirth, "Does prayer influence the success of in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer? Report of a masked, randomized trial," Journal of Reproductive Medicine, September 2001.
http://www.the-scientist.com/pubmed/11584476
A McCook, "IVF-prayer study raises doubts," The Scientist, June 14, 2004.
http://www.the-scientist.com/article/display/22226
For Advertisers
Rate this article
Return to Top comment: On Lee's response in the F&S/KSOG plagiarism matter by Lawrence B. Ebert [Comment posted 2007-04-07 15:43:07] To get to the bottom of this matter, one needs additional information, including:
1. A copy of the original manuscript sent by Lee to F&S, to see whether Kim is a named co-author, or merely acknowledged. 2. A copy of the agreement signed by Lee with F&S, to see if there is mention of "no prior publications" AND if Lee disclosed the existence of Korean patent application number 10-0554102 (relevant both as a prior publication AND as a financial conflict of interest) 3. A copy of any contract between Kim and Cha, to understand what obligations Dr. Kim had to the Cha organization. More details can be found at http://ipbiz.blogspot.com/2007/04/further-fulminations-in-cirms-cha-gate.html Return to Top comment: Response of the Corresponding Author by Sook-Hwan Lee, M.D., Ph.D [Comment posted 2007-03-26 15:55:24] Dear Editor --
Your February 20 article ￂﾓFertility journal censures scientistsￂﾔ contained inaccuracies and omitted important facts regarding a paper by myself and my colleagues in the journal Fertility & Sterility titled The Quantitative Analysis of Mitochondrial DNA Copy Number in Premature Ovarian Failure Patients Using the Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction (2005). It is not true that Dr. Jeong Hwan Kim ￂﾓperformed the bulk of the research,ￂﾔ nor is it true the paper was submitted to F&S without Dr. Kim listed as an author. As of this writing, F&S has not censured me or any other authors. And Dr. DeCherneyￂﾒs comment that all of the authors of the paper ￂﾓperjured themselvesￂﾔ is baseless, as I will explain below. The concept for this research originated with Dr. Kwang-Yul Cha in 1998. Dr. Cha and I designed and wrote the research proposal in 2001. Koreaￂﾒs Ministry of Health and Welfare funded the research. My intent from the beginning was to seek publication in an SCI journal. Most of the research was accomplished by myself and other researchers in the Human Genetics Laboratory of CHA Hospital. Dr. Kim became involved in 2002 when he asked for my guidance on his doctorate thesis and joined us as a part-time researcher. I am told that he claims to have collected all 30 of the POF patient samples. We have documented proof he collected only two patientsￂﾒ samples, and he collected no control samples. Other CHA Hospital doctors collected most specimens, and other scientists at the Human Genetics Laboratory accomplished all DNA extraction, prerequisite for real-time PCR. Dr. Kim compiled the basic statistics and wrote the thesis in Korean. I agreed to help Dr. Kim with his doctoral thesis and permit him to participate in the research on the condition that any resulting paper would be submitted to an SCI journal. Upon receiving his degree from another institution, however, Dr. Kim submitted the thesis in Korean to the non-SCI Korean Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology (KSOG), listing himself as first and corresponding author, without my knowledge or consent. He also took all of our data without authorization and moved out of Korea leaving no forwarding address. I subsequently filed a legal complaint against Dr. Kim that is being investigated by the Korean Public Prosecutors Office. Unable to locate Dr. Kim, KSOG recognized my name among the authors listed and contacted me. This was the first I was aware the paper had been submitted to KSOG. Perhaps I should not have done so for my student, but I agreed to be the corresponding author when KSOG could not find Dr. Kim. (I am told that Dr. Kim says locating him would have been easy, but KSOG was unable to find him. More recently, an official Korean Public Prosecutors Office document stated that his whereabouts were ￂﾓunverifiable.ￂﾔ) The loss of our original data deprived me of an ability to write a second paper, yet I remained committed to submitting the research to an SCI publication. I translated the KSOG paper into English and submitted it to F&S with myself as the corresponding author. Dr. Cha was listed as the first author on the F&S article because he originated the idea for the project and provided guidance and oversight for the collection of the patient samples. He was entitled under the relevant rules to ￂﾓfirst authorￂﾔ credit. Dr. Kim was included as an author on the original submission to F&S. My Feb. 5, 2005 letter to the editor of F&S, enclosing the manuscript, credited him with ￂﾓclinicopathologica1 analysis and statistical analysis." But Dr. Kim could not be found to sign paperwork required by F&S. His name was dropped for this reason only. When Dr Kim surfaced in 2006, I wrote two letters to F&S requesting his inclusion as an author. F&S never replied. The paperwork F&S required the authors to sign was related to ￂﾓfinancialￂﾔ conflict of interests, not prior publication. None of the other authors, except myself, knew that the article had been published in KSOG. Hence, Dr. DeCherneyￂﾒs ￂﾑperjuryￂﾒ allegation against the authors is without merit. I express my sincere regret for the controversy and assume full responsibility as the corresponding author of the paper. No one else is to blame. No harm, sanctions or reputational damage should be directed to my co-authors. I ask that you publish this letter in full in order to set the record straight. Return to Top comment: Cha claims it is a organized witch-hunt by US! by Skepts [Comment posted 2007-02-22 14:30:13] My Korean colleague told me yesterday that KY Cha was claiming his INNOCENSE by saying it was an organized witch-hunt by the US media.
Most of the Korean media seemed to complain that the US media were trying to denounce the Korean hospital owned by Cha in LA only because it was doing SO WELL. The media also said that it was not until July 2006 that the plagiarism was officially been banned in Korea. Huh? Is that right? But he published the plagiarized one in US. Return to Top comment: Kwang Cha is in trouble again by support science not superstition [Comment posted 2007-02-21 16:11:02] In 2001 Dr. Kwang Cha published a preposterous paper in the Journal of Reproductive Medicine. The results defied the laws of physics. One of Cha's co-authors went to prison for fraud and the other admitted he had nothing to do with the alleged research. But the JRM refused to retract the paper because Cha insisted it was legitimate. Now Cha is in trouble again and only one question remains. Will the JRM ever throw out Cha's garbage? Return to Top comment: is this news? by popeye [Comment posted 2007-02-21 00:31:45] it seems to be business as usual as far as I can tell. this type of thing happens frequently. every scientist can tell a story of a self serving colleague cutting them out of a paper or stealing their work.
not many tell the story of how they did it to some one else though. perhaps there are just a few very successful people who base their success on taking others' work without proper acknowledgement. or perhaps this type of thing is just standard practice in science. |
|||||||