Safeguarding Scientific Integrity: Examining Conflicts of Interest in the Peer Review Process

08/08/2023
by   Leslie D. McIntosh, et al.
0

This case study analyzes the expertise, potential conflicts of interest, and objectivity of editors, authors, and peer reviewers involved in a 2022 special journal issue on fertility, pregnancy, and mental health. Data were collected on qualifications, organizational affiliations, and relationships among six papers' authors, three guest editors, and twelve peer reviewers. Two articles were found to have undisclosed conflicts of interest between authors, an editor, and multiple peer reviewers affiliated with anti-abortion advocacy and lobbying groups, indicating compromised objectivity. This lack of transparency undermines the peer review process and enables biased research and disinformation proliferation. To increase integrity, we recommend multiple solutions: open peer review, expanded conflict of interest disclosure, increased stakeholder accountability, and retraction when ethical standards are violated. By illuminating noncompliance with ethical peer review guidelines, this study aims to raise awareness to help prevent the propagation of partisan science through respected scholarly channels.

READ FULL TEXT

page 5

page 6

page 8

page 9

page 10

research
12/17/2021

Do conspicuous manuscripts experience shorter time in the duration of peer review?

A question often asked by authors is how long would it take for the peer...
research
10/14/2022

A Study and Analysis of Manuscript Publications in the Open Access Journals

The purpose of this study is to analyze the research article publishing ...
research
01/13/2020

Possibility and prevention of inappropriate data manipulation in Polar Data Journal

Stakeholders in the scientific field must always maintain transparency i...
research
02/05/2018

The Social Structure of Consensus in Scientific Review

Personal connections between creators and evaluators of scientific works...
research
03/16/2021

Technical Debt in the Peer-Review Documentation of R Packages: a rOpenSci Case Study

Context: Technical Debt is a metaphor used to describe code that is "not...
research
04/05/2012

Mathematicians take a stand

We survey the reasons for the ongoing boycott of the publisher Elsevier....
research
12/02/2017

Artificial intelligence in peer review: How can evolutionary computation support journal editors?

With the volume of manuscripts submitted for publication growing every y...

Please sign up or login with your details

Forgot password? Click here to reset