Safeguarding Scientific Integrity: Examining Conflicts of Interest in the Peer Review Process
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
This case study analyzes the expertise, potential conflicts of interest, and objectivity of editors, authors, and peer reviewers involved in a 2022 special journal issue on fertility, pregnancy, and mental health. Data were collected on qualifications, organizational affiliations, and relationships among six papers' authors, three guest editors, and twelve peer reviewers. Two articles were found to have undisclosed conflicts of interest between authors, an editor, and multiple peer reviewers affiliated with anti-abortion advocacy and lobbying groups, indicating compromised objectivity. This lack of transparency undermines the peer review process and enables biased research and disinformation proliferation. To increase integrity, we recommend multiple solutions: open peer review, expanded conflict of interest disclosure, increased stakeholder accountability, and retraction when ethical standards are violated. By illuminating noncompliance with ethical peer review guidelines, this study aims to raise awareness to help prevent the propagation of partisan science through respected scholarly channels.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 8 Aug 2023.
Builds on
No reference list yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2024: 1.
1 paper.
- 2024AgentReview: Exploring Peer Review Dynamics with LLM Agentscited by 93
- 2024AgentReview: Exploring Peer Review Dynamics with LLM Agents18 Jun 2024