Is Biomedical Research Protected from Predatory Reviewers?
Authors endure considerable hardship carrying out biomedical research, from generating ideas to completing their manuscripts and submitting their findings and data (as is increasingly required) to a journal. When researchers submit to journals, they entrust their findings and ideas to editors and pe...
| Publicado en: | Science & Engineering Ethics Vol. 25; no. 1; pp. 293 - 322 |
|---|---|
| Autores principales: | , |
| Formato: | Artículo |
| Publicado: |
Springer Nature
Feb2019
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hlh&AN=135326481&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: hlh uiTerm: 135326481 longDbName: Humanities International Complete uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: jinfo: jid: 13533452 GNI jtl: Science & Engineering Ethics issn: 13533452 maglogo: N pubinfo: dt: Feb2019 vid: 25 iid: 1 pid: 237 pub: Springer Nature artinfo: ui: 135326481 10.1007/s11948-017-9964-5 ppf: 293 ppct: 29 formats: fmt: – @attributes: type: T – @attributes: type: P size: 625KB tig: atl: Is Biomedical Research Protected from Predatory Reviewers? aug: au: Al-Khatib, Aceil Teixeira da Silva, Jaime A. affil: Faculty of Dentistry, Jordan University of Science and Technology, P. O. Box 3030, 22110, Irbid, Jordan P. O. Box 7, Miki-cho Post Office, Ikenobe 3011-2, 761-0799, Kagawa-ken, Japan su: Biological research Trust Confidential communications Ethics Professional peer review Plagiarism sug: subj: Biological research Trust Confidential communications Ethics Professional peer review Plagiarism keyword: Confidentiality Peer review thieves ab: Authors endure considerable hardship carrying out biomedical research, from generating ideas to completing their manuscripts and submitting their findings and data (as is increasingly required) to a journal. When researchers submit to journals, they entrust their findings and ideas to editors and peer reviewers who are expected to respect the confidentiality of peer review. Inherent trust in peer review is built on the ethical conduct of authors, editors and reviewers, and on the respect of this confidentiality. If such confidentiality is breached by unethical reviewers who might steal or plagiarize the authors' ideas, researchers will lose trust in peer review and may resist submitting their findings to that journal. Science loses as a result, scientific and medical advances slow down, knowledge may become scarce, and it is unlikely that increasing bias in the literature will be detected or eliminated. In such a climate, society will ultimately be deprived from scientific and medical advances. Despite a rise in documented cases of abused peer review, there is still a relative lack of qualitative and quantitative studies on reviewer-related misconduct, most likely because evidence is difficult to come by. Our paper presents an assessment of editors' and reviewers' responsibilities in preserving the confidentiality of manuscripts during the peer review process, in response to a 2016 case of intellectual property theft by a reviewer. Our main objectives are to propose additional measures that would offer protection of authors' intellectual ideas from predatory reviewers, and increase researchers' awareness of the responsible reviewing of journal articles and reporting of biomedical research. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: Article src: R language: English refInfo: copyright: @attributes: flag: Y custom: Science & Engineering Ethics is a copyright of Springer, 2019. All Rights Reserved. item: Science & Engineering Ethics holder: Springer Nature dt: @attributes: year: 2019 holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|