論文盗用

「査読者が投稿論文を盗用!!　米一流誌」
という記事が医療系ニュースでありました。

まあ、「そんなことはよくあるんだろうな～」的に思っていたのですが、こんなにマジに公の場で、糾弾できるとは…自由の国アメリカですね。
糾弾しようとしても、その告発自体潰されてしまうような気がするのですがね…

以下全文引用です。盗用された人が、盗用した人に送ったお手紙です。

-------------------------------------------

Dear Plagiarist: A Letter to a Peer Reviewer Who Stole and Published Our Manuscript as His Own
http://annals.org/aim/article/2592773/dear-plagiarist-letter-peer-reviewer-who-stole-published-our-manuscript

Dr. Doctor,
I am aware that you recently admitted to wrongly publishing, as your own, a scientific research paper that I had submitted to Annals of Internal Medicine. After serving as an external peer reviewer on our manuscript, you published that same manuscript in a different medical journal a few months later. You removed the names of the authors and the research site, replacing them with the names of your coauthors and your institution.
It took 5 years from conceptualization of the study to publication of the primary analysis (1). This study was my fellowship project and required a lot of work. It took effort to find the right research team, design the study, raise the funds, get approvals, recruit and create materials for study participants, run the diet classes, conduct the study visits, compile and analyze the study data, and write the initial report. The work was funded by the U.S. government and my academic institution. The secondary analysis that you reviewed for Annals used specialized methods that took my colleagues many years to develop and validate. In all, this body of research represents at least 4000 hours of work. When you published our work as your own (2), you were falsely claiming credit for all of this work and for the expertise gained by doing it.
As you must certainly know, stealing is wrong. It is especially problematic in scientific research. The peer-review process depends on the ethical behavior of reviewers. Physicians and patients depend on the integrity of the process. Such cases of theft, scientific fraud, and plagiarism cannot be tolerated because they are harmful and unethical. Those who engage in such behavior can typically expect their professional careers to be ruined: Loss of reputation, loss of employment, and ineligibility for future research funding are the norm. Coauthors are also collaborators in the fraud, and such losses potentially apply to them as well. All the previous publications of those who steal others' work become suspect, and it reflects poorly on their training institutions, current employers, collaborators, and mentors.
It is hard to understand why you would risk so much. You have no doubt worked hard to become a physician and scientist. I know that you have published many research papers. It just doesn't make sense. Whether the pressure to publish is so intense, or whether the culture where you work is relatively permissive such that plagiarism is not taken as seriously, or whether getting caught seemed unlikely—it is hard to imagine why you would take this chance.
I hope you will not steal anyone else's research in the future. Instead, perhaps there is some way you can assist the scientific community's efforts to reverse the growing epidemic of plagiarism and scientific fraud. Helping to raise awareness of the problem and identifying potential solutions would be positive steps in the right direction.

(1); JAMA. 2005 Jan 5;293(1):43-53.

(2); Notice of retraction: the improvement of large high-density lipoprotein (HDL) particle levels, and presumably HDL metabolism, depend on effects of low-carbohydrate diet and weight loss
[retraction of: Finelli C, Crispino P, Gioia C, La Sala N, D'amico L, La Grotta M, et al. In: EXCLI J. 2016;15:166-76]

それを受けての編集者の対応結果が以下です。

Scientific Misconduct Hurts

http://annals.org/aim/article/2592772/scientific-misconduct-hurts

Plagiarism and other forms of intellectual theft are far more common in science than one would like to think (1–3). Recently, Annals of Internal Medicine experienced an egregious case of scientific misconduct that I bring to light for 2 reasons—to assure readers that Annals takes such matters very seriously and to serve as an example that might deter such misbehavior.
In June 2015, Dansinger and colleagues from Tufts University in Boston, Massachusetts, submitted a manuscript to Annals titled “One-Year Effectiveness of the Atkins, Zone, Weight Watchers, and Ornish Diets for Increasing Large High-Density Lipoprotein Particle Levels: A Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Trial.” After external peer review, we decided not to publish the manuscript and sent our decision to the authors in July 2015. In August 2016, Dansinger contacted Annalswhen he became aware of an article published in the EXCLI Journal on 23 February 2016 that was almost identical to the manuscript that he and his colleagues had submitted to Annals. His concern was that an Annals reviewer may have misappropriated the content of his manuscript, plagiarized the work, and published it in the EXCLI Journal. We determined that an author of the article in the EXCLI Journal was, in fact, someone who had reviewed the manuscript for Annals. When I contacted that person, he admitted to plagiarism and I informed the editor of the EXCLI Journal. The journal retracted the fraudulent article in September 2016 (4). As is the recommended practice when scientific misconduct is uncovered (5–7), I informed the leadership of the institution listed as sponsoring the fraudulent article. The institution acknowledged receipt of this information but did not indicate the actions, if any, that it planned in response.
This case shows several layers of bold misconduct. First, peer reviewers should maintain the confidentiality of the papers they review (5–7). They should refrain from using for their own purposes what they learn during peer review until the work is published and can be cited as the source of that information.
Second, the reviewer blatantly plagiarized Dansinger and colleagues' work, reproducing almost verbatim the text, tables, and figures.
Third, the reviewer fabricated a cohort of European patients that did not exist—a particularly egregious act that could have resulted in clinicians (unknowingly) basing decisions about patient care on fraudulent data.
Fourth, the plagiarized article had many coauthors. These coauthors are also culpable. They allowed their names to be used, apparently without contributing anything of value—not even verification of the study's existence.
My colleagues and I find it deeply disturbing that someone whom we selected to review a manuscript entrusted to us would commit such heinous intellectual theft. We thankfully do not have previous experience with such a situation but believe our response was congruent with recommendations (5–7). Although the fraudulent article was retracted, it is worrisome that, at the time this is written, it remains available in PubMed Central without an indication that it has been retracted (8).
Dansinger, the author whose work was stolen, provides an impassioned letter to the plagiarizer outlining the harm that this misbehavior has caused for both those who did the research and those who attempted to pass it off as their own (9). Other casualties include the reputation of the plagiarizer's institution; faith in the peer-review process; and, importantly, the public's trust in medical research. Dansinger deserves commendation for the grace with which he has weathered this unfortunate situation and his desire that something positive come from it. His commentary and the circumstances behind it provide a compelling case for educational activities related to scientific integrity. Providing the information that guides patient care is important, and tampering with that process is dangerous. If reading Dansinger's commentary prevents even 1 person from stealing another's work, something good will come from it.

(引用論文は割愛します)

--------------------------------------------

引用終わりです。

まあ、なんでこの記事を原文からキチンと読んでみようと思ったのかというと…

盗用論文が、僕のテーマである、「HDLの機能や代謝が、食事内容によって変わる。」

という内容なんですね。(考えることは皆同じか･･･)

引用の(1)のLast Authorが僕の尊敬する、Prf. Scheaferなんです。そうなんです、あの超メジャーラボのボスの臨床研究結果を、まんまパクって、ありもしない臨床研究をでっち上げて他誌で出版するなんて…

しかし、このような犯罪が明るみになるのは、大ボスがしっかり管理されているからではないでしょうか？Prf. Scheaferは、自身の関わる論文はすべて目を通して、きっちり管理されているそうなのです。

他にも、「某ラボの解析結果が間違っている！」といった内容の論文に対して、「その見解こそが誤っている！」のように雑誌上で殴り合いのようなディスカッションが公にされているのを見たりします。

日本の雑誌で、こんなことはあるのでしょうか？

今後注意深く見てゆきたいと思います。


追記
盗用されないようにする方法として、投稿時の手紙にpre-print serverに登録してます。とする方法もあるらしいです。

ボストン市街にあるタフツ大学の臨床研究棟です。