A recent case submitted to the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) involved the submission and subsequent publication of a case report that had previously appeared in a non-English language journal. The authors, upon receiving a letter from the head of department of one author pointing out the duplication, were asked to explain the discrepancy.
The COPE advice acknowledged grounds for retraction but considered issuing a "notice of duplicate publication" as more appropriate due to the language difference between the two publications. Two main issues were identified: the authorship discrepancy and the duplicate publication concern. Additionally, potential copyright issues with the first journal were noted. COPE advised writing to the author's institution, recommending contacting the Dean for an unbiased investigation.
In the follow-up, the authors defended their actions, stating that the previous publication was not considered scientific, providing a copy of the instructions to authors. However, upon closer examination, it was revealed that the magazine was indeed a reputable journal in their country of origin and was indexed on PUBMED. The statement about "not writing a scientific publication" was contextualized within the guide to style section and intended to encourage clear writing, not to define the nature of the journal.
In light of these findings, the article was withdrawn, underscoring the importance of adhering to ethical standards in scientific publishing and addressing instances of duplicate publication. COPE guidance played a crucial role in facilitating a fair and informed resolution to the case.