Xinhua News Agency, Beijing, April 26th: Investigation on the withdrawal of more than 100 international papers.
Xinhua News Agency "Xinhua Viewpoint" reporters Jie Wenjin and Dong Ruifeng
Recently, Tumor Biology, which was affiliated to springer Company, a famous international publisher, voiced its voice and revoked 107 papers of China scholars included in the magazine. To this end, "Xinhua Viewpoint" reporters conducted an investigation on the focus issues of public concern.
Focus 1: Why are all 107 retracted manuscripts concentrated in the medical field?
After the incident, many people expressed their incomprehension: Why are these 107 retracted manuscripts concentrated in the medical field?
The relevant person in charge of Lilac Garden, an Internet communication platform for well-known medical professionals, told the reporter that all the papers involved were published in the American Journal of Tumor Biology, which belongs to the medical field and only publishes medical papers.
According to the China Association for Science and Technology, among the natural science papers published every year in China, medical papers account for more than half, and the volume is huge, and the probability of irregularities is greater than that in other fields.
Peter Butler, editor-in-chief of cell biology and biochemistry in springer, told the reporter that this large-scale retraction was the result of further manual investigation of the retraction events in 2015 and 2016 by springer Publishing Group, and it was not a newly discovered fraud event. At present, the publisher of Tumor Biology has been changed to SAGE. A senior editor of a medical SCI journal in China believes that "publishers of academic journals attach great importance to the reputation of their publications, and it is not uncommon to liquidate the problems left over before during the change of publishers".
Focus 2: Is peer review fraud procedural fraud or academic fraud?
It is reported that most of the withdrawn manuscripts escaped the review and monitoring through the way of "real review experts’ fake mailboxes". Some people suggest that this kind of peer review fraud is different from content fraud and belongs to procedural flaws.
The head of the China Association for Science and Technology said in an interview that "peer review fraud" is an out-and-out "academic fraud". Peter Butler said, "The peer review process is one of the cornerstones to ensure the quality, integrity and repeatability of scientific research. This is an indispensable part of the scientific review process before the manuscript is received. "
Wang Zixing, a psychiatrist at Capital Medical University, said that many academic journals involve multiple disciplines. In order to save the cost of running journals as much as possible, only a few editors may be arranged under a big major. The medical field is all-encompassing, and reviewers may not be familiar with all the fields involved in the manuscript. Therefore, the opinions of peer reviewers are an important reference for editors and also become a "safety valve" for academic quality of papers.
Since the review process is so important, why does the publication allow the author to recommend himself as a "gatekeeper"? Is it easy to cause fraud? Wang Zixing said that the selection of reviewers was partly selected by publications through their own channels and partly by self-recommendation. This is because journal editors are not necessarily familiar with the research fields and experts of contributors, and it is difficult to select reviewers, so they hope to conduct expert evaluation by the way of self-recommendation. Peter Butler said that letting the authors recommend themselves to the judges is a "trust-based" way to alleviate the above problems. "If someone deliberately circumvents the system, they may succeed."
However, in the face of the criticism that "if the editor makes one more verification call, he can see through the fraud", Peter Butler admits that "springer, as a publisher, has the responsibility to ensure that the publishing process goes as smoothly as possible and meets the ethical requirements, and at the same time, it has the responsibility to meet the new challenges with innovative tools. Therefore, springer will continue to invest in the development of more advanced systems for the authentication of reviewers to prevent similar situations from happening in the future. "
Focus 3: Is the author an "accomplice" or a "lying gun" of a fake intermediary?
Springer said: "It is not clear whether the author of the manuscript is aware of these institutions’ plans to impersonate reviewers.". According to the China Association for Science and Technology, there is no evidence that any contributor participated in the fraud.
It is reported that it is common for international paper contributors to employ third-party companies to provide language polishing services, which is also allowed within a proper scope, mainly because some contributors are not good enough in foreign languages and are not familiar with the process.
The reporter learned from the Lilac Garden that some of the 524 doctors involved in this exposure did not know. A surgeon in a famous 3A hospital in Beijing was very wronged when he saw that he was among the authors of the retracted papers. The doctor said that he did contribute to the research involved in this paper, but "I don’t know anything about the submission, let alone that it was submitted through a third-party intermediary". It is understood that apart from the first author and correspondent, some people with lower signatures often only participate in the minor part of the paper or belong to the same project team, and play a minor role in the publication of the paper, so they may not know that they are listed.
However, an editor of a former medical SCI journal believes that when the pressure to publish a paper meets the impulse to make a profit, "some people indulge, at least pretend to be confused with understanding."
A young doctor in a famous 3A hospital in Shanghai said that publishing papers has become the lifeblood of young doctors’ promotion at present, and "only holding a scalpel but not a pen is absolutely hopeless". Therefore, many peers choose to submit their papers through third-party organizations that promise to publish their papers successfully.
Focus 4: How does the paper "black intermediary" collect money?
According to the survey, the publication fee of a paper in an SCI international academic journal ranges from several thousand yuan to several hundred thousand yuan, and the intermediary can make huge profits from it.
In September 2015, the Special Committee on Ethics and Rights of Science and Technology Workers of the Standing Committee of China Association for Science and Technology issued the "Five No’s Code of Conduct for Publishing Papers in International Academic Journals", which made it clear that "the third party" refers to any institution or individual except the author and the journal, and prohibited the third party from modifying the facts of the papers and writing on behalf of others in the name of providing "language services".
Recently, the reporter searched on Taobao with the keyword "SCI paper publication" and found that a large number of merchants marked related businesses. The page of a merchant named "SCEI Paper Academic Service" shows that there are 20,000 fans. After clicking on the item marked with a monthly turnover of 23,821, the reporter consulted about the publication of the paper.
The store said that it can write a paper on the subject of cardiology within six months to one year, and ensure that it is published in foreign SCI journals. The publication level is determined by the reporter, and the charging standard is determined by the influence of the journal. The price ranges from 38,000 yuan to 180,000 yuan, and the page fee of about 2,000 US dollars is also borne by the reporter. You need to pay a deposit of 10 thousand yuan first, and settle the balance after publication. The store also said, "All the experimental data in our paper are true and can show our strength."
In a merchant named "Chinese-English Medical Home", the customer service claimed to be a doctor of medicine, and he was a front-line medical worker. The quotation was that the publication with an impact factor of more than five points was 50,000 yuan per minute, and the page fee was about 2,000 US dollars, and he clearly told which publication he could publish. For the price of a paper of 270 thousand yuan, the customer service said, "it’s all like this, it’s worth it, and it will pay off."
Alibaba said that since 2017, the platform has intercepted 16 keywords such as "writing for papers" and "writing for periodicals" by actively controlling similar risky goods, but it has also been found that some merchants have released them through keyword variation, bypassing platform supervision.
Focus 5: How to rebuild China’s reputation of academic integrity?
Springer told reporters that "these revoked papers do not represent and reflect the overall quality and pioneering achievements of scientific research results published by China researchers." However, many people in the industry said that it is an indisputable fact that China’s reputation for scientific integrity has been damaged.
According to the reporter’s understanding, after more than 100 international papers were withdrawn in 2015, the China Association for Science and Technology warned in the Investigation Report on the Withdrawal of BMC that the risk of large-scale withdrawal for the same reason might continue thereafter. This research report pointed out that most of the units involved in the retraction of the manuscript did not seriously carry out the investigation, and their understanding of the seriousness of the incident was not unified. The investigation work was not in-depth and the handling was light, and no corresponding measures were established based on this. Only a few units have imposed severe penalties on the authors involved, such as canceling their professional titles, positions and appraising their qualifications.
Recently, the China Association for Science and Technology said that those who received funding from the National Natural Science Foundation of China must be recovered, and the fund cannot be declared again in the next five years. Other treatments should be made by the relevant author’s unit.
Zhuo Hongyong, director of the Newspapers and Periodicals Division of the State Administration of Press, Publication, Radio, Film and Television, believes that the problems in the field of periodicals are the end, and the talent evaluation mechanism is often the source. Dr. Chen Yun, senior manager of clove garden content, believes that the derivation of the interest chain of paper fraud is precisely because the assessment of medical workers relies too much on the publication of papers.
In July, 2016, the Ministry of Human Resources and Social Security issued "Opinions of Ministry of Human Resources and Social Security on Strengthening the Construction of Professional and Technical Personnel at the Grass-roots Level", suggesting that in the future, professional and technical personnel such as doctors at the grass-roots level will not have rigid requirements for papers and scientific research.