COPE is an independent UK Registered Charity dedicated to advancing ethical standards in journal publication internationally, and to providing support and advice to editors, authors, publishers, professional organisations, and regulatory and investigative bodies in the complex field of publication ethics and fraud.

Operational Director: role description

Introduction

Outline job description and core components

RAISING THE QUALITY OF ACADEMIC JOURNALS

COPE council member: role description

Purpose of role

• To be responsible, together with other council members, for the policy and management of the Committee on Publication Ethics.

Appointment and length of tenure

• Council members will be appointed by COPE Council for three years, with the possibility of an additional three years.

Key responsibilities

• Act as a Trustee for COPE
• Attend and take a full part in quarterly meetings of Council
• Attend and contribute to quarterly Forum meetings (council and Forum meetings are held on the same day)
• Take part in additional policy discussions (usually by email) and approve annual budget
• Monitor expenditure and supervise the administration of COPE
• Make appointments to Council and other positions
• Compile shortlists of candidates for elections of Officers
• Take part in sub-committees and other tasks as agreed  by Council
• Represent COPE externally when required to do so by Council

Person specification

• Good understanding of and judgement on business matters
• An informed view on medical/ academic publishing
• An ethical framework with which to judge medical/ academic publishing in general and editorial activities  in particular
• Expertise that will benefit COPE, such as writing, editing, publishing, training, law, accountancy, public relations, human resources, fundraising etc

COMMITTEE ON PUBLICATION ETHICS PRESS RELEASE JULY 23 2008

Editors get guidance on international ethical differences

Aim is to stop good studies remaining unpublished

The Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), a UK-based charity representing more than 3500 editors of scientific journals, has come up with guidance that it hopes will stop editors rejecting good studies because of disputes over whether they have met ethical requirements.

           The problem has arisen because of a distinction in some countries between original research, which sets up a situation to be observed, and audit or service evaluation which looks at what is already happening. In some countries, such as the UK, the former need formal ethical approval while the latter do not.

One unintended consequence is that editors of medical journals may refuse to publish the results of audits because they have not received approval from a research ethics committee, when the committee may have refused to look at the study.

'This is bad for patients', says Dr Harvey Marcovitch, chairman of COPE. 'Really useful information which could help provide better treatment may remain hidden.'

The guidance can be found at below. In it COPE says that editors should ask themselves four key questions:

• How important is the study?

• How reliable is the study?

• Have the authors paid attention to patient protection?

• What do regulations state in the country where the study was done?

“This will make sure that medical advances are not halted by confusion about what is ethically allowable”, says Dr Marcovitch.

 
About COPE
COPE (http://www.publicationethics.org.uk/) is a forum for editors of peer-reviewed journals to discuss issues related to the integrity of the scientific record; it supports and encourages editors to report, catalogue and instigate investigations into ethical problems in the publication process. Formed in 1997, the Committee on Publication Ethics' (COPE) major objective is to provide a sounding board for editors who were struggling with how best to deal with possible breaches in research and publication ethics.

For further information contact:

Elizabeth Wager

Phone +44-(0)1844-275814

liz@sideview.demon.co.uk

or

Sabine Kleinert
Phone: + 44 (0) 207 424 4933
sabine.kleinert@lancet.com

Registered office: COPE, Hempsons House, 40 Villiers St, London WC2N 6NJ,
United Kingdom

GUIDANCE FOR EDITORS: RESEARCH, AUDIT AND SERVICE EVALUATIONS

Regulations regarding what type of study requires ethical approval vary worldwide. In some countries all studies require ethical approval but in others not. This may lead to submission to journals of manuscripts relating to such studies that do not satisfy the journal’s normal requirement for independent ethical approval, and rejection of the manuscript because of misunderstanding of local regulations.

In the UK, for example, the National Research Ethics Service (NRES), which coordinates and regulates ethical approval of research involving human subjects, specifically excludes projects from requiring ethical approval if they fall into the categories of audit or service evaluation, even though: (i) both may have considerable ethical implications (e.g. the danger of coercion and threats to autonomy and confidentiality); (ii) their methods may overlap with studies defined as ‘research’; and (iii) it may be difficult to decide how to define certain studies, even using the criteria suggested by NRES.

Other countries may have similar restrictions that make it difficult or unnecessary to obtain approval for certain types of study.

This guidance has therefore been produced by COPE as an aid to journal editorial teams who are required to review such manuscripts.

COPE recommends that editors reviewing such a manuscript should consider the following, in addition to the usual criteria that are applied during editorial review:

(1)     Is the study scientifically valid and clearly presented; for example is the sample size adequate, are the results adequately and clearly presented and explained, and have the investigators excluded or considered the possible confounding factors and/or biases? Second, does the study contribute sufficiently to knowledge to make acceptance and publication a possibility?

(2)     Have the ethical harms been minimised; for example has due care been taken to avoid coercion or exploitation, to protect confidentiality, to minimise the risk of physical and psychological harm and to respect autonomy where possible? (For example, information sheets and consent forms can still be used for certain audits and service evaluations as a demonstration that appropriate ethical standards are being met, even if a research ethics committee has not asked for it). It may be necessary to seek further information from the investigators to establish how they have addressed these issues.

(3)     Do the benefits outweigh the harms in this particular study’s case?

(4)     If there is doubt about local law or regulations, editors should clarify this with the authors and ask them to provide a letter from the research ethics committee about the research.

COPE acknowledges that aspects of this process may already be followed by editorial teams as part of their review of papers, and are also similar to those undertaken by research ethics committees themselves when considering applications. It is suggested, however, that following the above scheme may provide a practical framework. Further, it is advised that such deliberations be documented as part of the journal’s standard record-keeping. Finally, it is hoped that this guidance will be useful for authors as well as editors.

CSE International Scholarship Program

The Council of Science Editors International Scholarship Program provides support for editors from developing nations to attend CSE Annual Meetings.  Several scholarships will be offered to CSE’s 52nd Annual Meeting in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA, May 1 – 5, 2009.  The scholarships are intended for editors in developing countries who contribute to the editorial content of journals in the sciences, medicine, or health care.  Applications from others who work in the field of scientific publications will also be considered.  Each funded scholar will receive free registration to the conference (including hotel stay and all meals) and partial reimbursement for travel expenses.  Recipients of the 2009 CSE International Scholarships may participate in a session during the annual meeting and may be asked to write a summary of their experience for possible publication in the CSE journalScience Editor.

Eligibility:  CSE defines “developing nations” as those countries that are eligible for free or low-cost access to biomedical literature through the World Health Organization’s Health InterNetwork Access to Research Initiative (HINARI).  Lists of countries eligible for free access (Band 1) or low-cost access (Band 2) are available on the HINARI website:  http://www.who.int/hinari/eligibility/en/index.html.  Only applicants from countries listed in either Band 1 or Band 2 are eligible to receive a CSE International Scholarship.  Therefore, persons interested in applying should first check their eligibility by referring to the Band 1 and Band 2 lists. 

Applications:  Applicants can access information about the International Scholarships and an application at: 
http://www.councilscienceeditors.org/events/annualmeeting09/scholarships.cfm

This information is also linked via the 2009 Annual Meeting button on the CSE home page: http://www.councilscienceeditors.org

Applications must be submitted on-line by 20 September 2008.  No mailed, emailed or faxed applications will be accepted. 

Selection process:  Scholarships will be awarded based on applicants’ responses to several questions. Their reasons for seeking to attend the CSE Annual Meeting, clarity of expression, and a thoughtful discussion of how they plan to use, apply, and share the knowledge gained at the meeting will reflect positively on the candidates’ applications.

Notification:  Scholarship winners will be notified by e-mail in early November 2008.

All Elsevier journals become COPE members

Editors will benefit from new partnership

London, UK, 13 February 2008 – The Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) is pleased to announce its partnership with Elsevier, publisher of scientific, technical and medical information products and services. More than 2000 journals, the full collection of Health Sciences and Science&Technology journals published by Elsevier (http://www.elsevier.com/), have been added to the list of COPE members.

 "Our editors face an increasing number of cases of plagiarism and unethical publishing behaviour. As publishing ethics is a major aspect of the peer-review process, we’re delighted  to announce the partnership with COPE which can act as a sounding board for all our editors seeking for an external authoritative opinion on difficult cases", said Martin Tanke, Managing Director, Elsevier S&T Journals Publishing.

 Editors from Elsevier can benefit from attending the COPE meetings, scheduled every three months, to discuss complex ethical problems which have arisen during the publication process. They will also have access to other editors, their peers, to examine cases of publishing misconduct. In addition, they will be able to use the information and educational services that COPE is developing.

 “We are very pleased to have the support of such a major publisher,” said Dr Harvey Marcovitch, chairman of COPE. “It shows that COPE is receiving growing support among publishers – and this in turn will enable us to improve the standards of publications worldwide.”

COPE contact details:
Tim Albert
Phone: + 44 1372 377848
tim@timalbert.co.uk

FUNDING AVAILABLE FOR RESEARCH PROJECTS

The Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) has established a Grant Scheme to fund research in the field of publication ethics. The Scheme is designed to provide financial support to any member of COPE for a defined research project that is in the broad area of the organisation’s interests, and specifically in the area of ethical standards and practice in biomedical publishing. The project should have a specific goal and be intended to form the kernel of a future publication.

 A maximum sum of £5000 will be allocated to any one project, but applications for smaller sums are welcomed.

 The terms and conditions of the Grant are as follows:

 1.  At least one of the applicants must be a member of COPE.

 2.  Calls for applications will be made twice a year with closing dates of 1 December and 1 June. An electronic version of the application form must be sent to the Administrator no later than 12 pm (noon GMT) on the closing date for consideration by COPE Council.

 3.  The application must contain a lay summary of the project, a definition of the question to be posed, sufficient methodological detail to allow assessment of the viability of the project, a clear timeline and a definition of the likely deliverables.  A full justification for the sum requested must accompany the application.

 4.  A report on the progress of the research should be presented within one year of the award and at the end of the project. The grant must be used within two years from the date of award, and balance sheets must be forwarded annually. These should be sent to the Administrator. Any remaining funds after two years must be returned.

 5.  It is anticipated that the work stemming from the project will be presented at one of COPE’s annual seminar meetings within 2–3 years of the award. Such data may also be published in peer-reviewed journals. Any publications or related presentations at meetings by the recipient emanating in part or whole from COPE’s support should be duly acknowledged and copies sent to the Administrator.

 Applications are reviewed by a COPE sub-committee. Applicants will be advised of a decision as soon as practicable after the deadline date.

 An application form can be obtained by contacting Linda Gough, COPE administrator, at cope_administrator@publicationethics.org or 01379 854181. For more information on COPE, see http://www.publicationethics.org.uk/

 The closing date for receipt of applications is 1 December 2008.

Committee on Publication Ethics -- Flowcharts

The COPE flowcharts have been written and designed as a practical step-by-step guide for journal editors to deal with the most common breaches of publication ethics that crop up repeatedly in scientific and biomedical journals before and after publication.

The 14 flowcharts have been informed by the hundreds of cases from around the world on which COPE has advised since its foundation in 1997. These breaches range from duplicate (redundant) publication through to copying other researchers’ work (plagiarism) to out and out fraud.

Download flowcharts (PDF 399 kB)

Dates of future COPE meetings

2008

Tuesday 2 December (deadline for cases 18 November)

2009

Tuesday 3 March 2009 (deadline for cases 17 February)

Tuesday 2 June 2009 (deadline for cases 19 May)

Wednesday 2 September 2009 (deadline for cases 19 August)

Wednesday 2 December 2009 (deadline for cases 18 November)

Seminar Friday 27 March 2009, 9.30am–4.30pm.

All Forum meeting from 3pm to 5pm, in the Boardroom, Woburn House, 20 Tavistock Square, London WC1H 9HQ

CASES FOR DISCUSSION MUST BE SENT TO THE ADMINISTRATOR NO LATER THAN 2 WEEKS BEFORE EACH MEETING.

Recommended reading: CSE's White Paper on Promoting Integrity in Scientific Journal Publications