IMPLANT DENTISTRY / VOLUME 25, NUMBER 1 2016
1
Editorial Kudos to COPE
“W
hat,” you ask, “is COPE?” We will answer that shortly. First, let us say that this journal is pleased and proud to be a member of COPE. Implant Dentistry pursues the highest possible standards of ethical scientific journalism. May we take you back to a recent editorial titled “Integrity of This Journal.” It, in essence, outlined the validity, indeed the necessity of the double-blind article review by qualified reviewers. COPE is a promoter and advocate of soundness, sanity, reliability, and professionalism within what is commonly known as “the literature.” It does this for many biomedical publications worldwide. It is not an enforcer. It holds forums, webinars, and symposiums in various parts of the world on veracity and the simple, yet complex, matter of truthfulness in publishing. COPE focuses on ethics, and indeed it does. COPE is the Committee on Publication Ethics. It was founded approximately 15 years ago “by a group of medical journal editors concerned about publication misconduct.” Listed as examples of misconduct are “plagiarism, attempted or actual redundant publication, attempts to pass off fraudulent data, unethical research, breaches of confidentiality,” and the like. As COPE clearly states, membership in this body “sends a signal to authors and reviewers that your journal upholds the highest standards, that you intend to follow COPE’s Code of Conduct, and that you will take appropriate action in cases of possible misconduct.” With COPE’s high standards of publication acceptance in mind, let us count some of the ways that this journal transcends just coping with mediocrity. In no particular order..Peer review is the arbiter of scientific quality. We have touted, and continue to tout, the qualifications of our assistant editors and senior editorial reviewers and active general re-
ISSN 1056-6163/16/02501-001 Implant Dentistry Volume 25 Number 1 Copyright © 2016 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved. DOI: 10.1097/ID.0000000000000377
viewers. They fulfill the double-blind evaluations which, in turn, fulfill a mandate of integrity without prejudice. Disclosures regarding financial and promotional arrangements of authors with companies that may be involved, either directly or peripherally, with the authors’ research project are mandatory for most professional journals, and Implant Dentistry is no exception. And now, as can be noted for many of the articles that have had universities as home base for research (both clinical and basic), we have added approval. This is another bridge that the author must traverse in having received permission to either proceed with the research project and/or approval of the article subsequent to completion of the project. This imprimatur is noted as approval by an Institutional Review Board (IRB) or by an Ethical Review Committee (ERC). These are particular to human and animal studies, respectively. Here is but one example of the substance of a COPE meeting.Eighth International Congress on Peer Review and Biomedical Publication, September 10, 2017, to September 12, 2017, Chicago, IL. “As with the previous congresses, the aim will be to improve the quality and credibility of biomedical information and to help advance the efficiency, effectiveness, and equitability of scientific information dissemination throughout the world.” Ultimately, such continuing vigilance benefits not only researchers and writers but also the public, our patients. Kudos to COPE; its Executive Officer, Natalie Ridgeway; its Administrator, Linda Gough; and its Membership Administrator, Sarah Gillmore.
Morton L. Perel, DDS, MScD Editor-In-Chief, IMPLANT DENTISTRY
Copyright Ó 2016 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
1
Editorial Kudos to COPE
“W
hat,” you ask, “is COPE?” We will answer that shortly. First, let us say that this journal is pleased and proud to be a member of COPE. Implant Dentistry pursues the highest possible standards of ethical scientific journalism. May we take you back to a recent editorial titled “Integrity of This Journal.” It, in essence, outlined the validity, indeed the necessity of the double-blind article review by qualified reviewers. COPE is a promoter and advocate of soundness, sanity, reliability, and professionalism within what is commonly known as “the literature.” It does this for many biomedical publications worldwide. It is not an enforcer. It holds forums, webinars, and symposiums in various parts of the world on veracity and the simple, yet complex, matter of truthfulness in publishing. COPE focuses on ethics, and indeed it does. COPE is the Committee on Publication Ethics. It was founded approximately 15 years ago “by a group of medical journal editors concerned about publication misconduct.” Listed as examples of misconduct are “plagiarism, attempted or actual redundant publication, attempts to pass off fraudulent data, unethical research, breaches of confidentiality,” and the like. As COPE clearly states, membership in this body “sends a signal to authors and reviewers that your journal upholds the highest standards, that you intend to follow COPE’s Code of Conduct, and that you will take appropriate action in cases of possible misconduct.” With COPE’s high standards of publication acceptance in mind, let us count some of the ways that this journal transcends just coping with mediocrity. In no particular order..Peer review is the arbiter of scientific quality. We have touted, and continue to tout, the qualifications of our assistant editors and senior editorial reviewers and active general re-
ISSN 1056-6163/16/02501-001 Implant Dentistry Volume 25 Number 1 Copyright © 2016 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved. DOI: 10.1097/ID.0000000000000377
viewers. They fulfill the double-blind evaluations which, in turn, fulfill a mandate of integrity without prejudice. Disclosures regarding financial and promotional arrangements of authors with companies that may be involved, either directly or peripherally, with the authors’ research project are mandatory for most professional journals, and Implant Dentistry is no exception. And now, as can be noted for many of the articles that have had universities as home base for research (both clinical and basic), we have added approval. This is another bridge that the author must traverse in having received permission to either proceed with the research project and/or approval of the article subsequent to completion of the project. This imprimatur is noted as approval by an Institutional Review Board (IRB) or by an Ethical Review Committee (ERC). These are particular to human and animal studies, respectively. Here is but one example of the substance of a COPE meeting.Eighth International Congress on Peer Review and Biomedical Publication, September 10, 2017, to September 12, 2017, Chicago, IL. “As with the previous congresses, the aim will be to improve the quality and credibility of biomedical information and to help advance the efficiency, effectiveness, and equitability of scientific information dissemination throughout the world.” Ultimately, such continuing vigilance benefits not only researchers and writers but also the public, our patients. Kudos to COPE; its Executive Officer, Natalie Ridgeway; its Administrator, Linda Gough; and its Membership Administrator, Sarah Gillmore.
Morton L. Perel, DDS, MScD Editor-In-Chief, IMPLANT DENTISTRY
Copyright Ó 2016 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
