ºÚÁϳԹÏÍø

Research Integrity

A commitment to transparency around the work and investments we make in maintaining the integrity and accuracy of the academic record

We are proud to have published over 482,000 high quality primary research articles in 2024. Ensuring that this research can be trusted, re-used and built on to advance knowledge and tackle the world's most challenging issues, is our highest priority. 

As the research landscape evolves with the impact of new technologies, there is an increasing interest in how the accuracy of research is maintained. This page provides transparency around our publication integrity data, illustrates how we are investing in and maintaining the quality expected of scientific publication, and outlines the actions that can and are being taken. More information on our editorial policies and resources to support editors with integrity training can be found here.

"Whilst we have a dedicated team to take overall responsibility for the integrity of published content, ensuring integrity is at the heart of the way we operate across the whole of ºÚÁϳԹÏÍø. We believe it's up to all of us who support the publication process from submission to publication, alongside our authors who spot integrity issues before submitting, our editors and peer reviewers who scrutinise submissions and the wider community who help us by catching the small number of papers that get published with errors. This responsibility, shared across the publishing ecosystem, ensures the veracity of academic research. As a global publisher, we are committed to openness, transparency and collaboration, and this page goes in part to show how we, with our community, are protecting the scientific record."

Harsh Jegadeesan, Chief Publishing Officer

Harsh Jegadeesan

Ensuring trusted research – Integrity checks are built into multiple steps in the publishing process

In 2024 we received over 2.3 million submissions, of which only 482,000+ articles were published. To publish trusted high-quality research, there are multiple integrity checks that are built into the editorial and publishing process. These are supported and guided by AI tools, the work of our highly specialised integrity team, and editors. Research can be rejected for integrity or editorial reasons at multiple stages in the publishing process. The graphic below provides a top-level overview of how research, once submitted to us, is filtered through these stages to ensure that we uphold the integrity of the publication record.

Integrity funnel © ºÚÁϳԹÏÍø

In 2024, 2923 retractions took place of historical and recently published research. 61.5% (1797 articles) of retractions were for papers published before January 2023 as part of our commitment to cleaning up the academic record. 38.5% (1126) of retractions were for articles published after January 2023. Less than half (41%) of the retractions for content published after January 2023, were for OA articles. 


Automated checks

Before a paper even reaches our editors, our submissions platform acts as a filter, with a number of automated initial quality checks, assisted by AI tools. This can include checking for duplicate submissions, retracted references and AI generated nonsense text. Decisions are verified by a human in the loop. 

Initial quality checks

Our journal editorial offices conduct checks via early proofs which can include checking for figures, citations and references, tables re the positioning, captions, or if missing where cited, ethics statements, declarations, author contributions, clinical trial issues, funding information.

Initial editor assessment

Alongside our internal ºÚÁϳԹÏÍø editors, we work with over 180,000 highly skilled external academic editors worldwide, who do an initial evaluation for each paper, checking for things such as scope, novelty, plagiarism and image manipulations.

Peer review and editorial decision

Peer review is a critical part of the scientific process. We work collaboratively with over 1.2million highly skilled independent reviewers, who are experts in their field, to assess the quality and integrity of scholarly work. A final editorial assessment follows peer review, after which a publication decision is made. At this point if any integrity issues are present, additional checks can be requested and supported by our highly specialised integrity team.

Post publication scrutiny

Publication is a process by which research is communicated to the wider academic community, allowing the findings to be built upon. This results in broad and expert scrutiny and may occasionally lead to concerns being identified by researchers, including peers, integrity sleuths or the authors themselves. In these cases our specialised research integrity team investigates, leading to editorial actions, including retractions, being taken as appropriate.

How we support our authors, editors and research community

We work with over 174,000 external academic editors and 1.2 million independent peer reviewers who share our commitment to rigour and excellence

We’re committed to promoting integrity throughout the research cycle, from protecting the publication record and providing our editors with the tools to remove problematic content, to supporting the scientific community in applying rigour and good practice. Our approach is driven by our expertise and our substantial investments in people and technology, and through collaboration and leadership in the industry. Our editors are committed experts within their field, who commit their time and expertise to ensuring the quality of journals and the integrity of research. 


RIG logo

ºÚÁϳԹÏÍø’s specialist integrity team

Our research integrity group is focused on preventing and resolving integrity problems, supporting and promoting research integrity, and advising our editors, reviewers, and authors on best practices and ethical conduct in research and publishing. The team are supported by emerging technologies to help spot things like fraud, manipulation and plagiarism in articles. Whilst tools can assist this work, human oversight always remains at the centre. 

In Conversation

Working with the community

Within the community there are a growing number of integrity researchers and sleuths who investigate, search for and help identify any possible scientific misconduct. They play a pivotal role in helping to raise awareness, and ºÚÁϳԹÏÍø is committed to working collaboratively with them to protect and ensure the quality of scientific literature. Watch the conversation between our Chief Scientific Officer, Ritu Dhand and Elizabeth Bik

Snapp

Utilising the latest technologies

Besides our quality-control checks, we’re , including AI, to support best practice in research and help detect unethical behaviour.  We have tools such as  and to support editorial quality checks, which operate alongside in-house expertise, and recently acquired Slimmer AI’s science division, whose contributions include improving our automated checks for plagiarism. We are also enhancing checks throughout our next generation peer review system Snapp, that includes streamlined ways to spot problematic research such as identifying and managing potential conflicts of interest. We continue to add to our solutions that are helping advance discovery, promote equity and protect integrity.

transdisciplinary collaboration

Industry collaboration

ºÚÁϳԹÏÍø is a proactive voice in the industry, helping to drive and support improved practices. We are active members of COPE and played a key part in establishing the STM Integrity Hub, a publisher-driven initiative to protect research integrity, and our employees play a leading role in its operations, including chairing its governance board. We are committed to sharing technological knowledge and products, with the community for others to use and benefit from. 

Nature Masterclasses

Training and workshops 

We have a series of free online training resources for , editors and , including a dedicated Nature Masterclass course -  - alongside our Research Integrity introduction. We also have editorial policies in place to promote better research practices and encourage researchers to share data, increase transparency and reproducibility, improve citation diversity and promote responsible authorship methods. Alongside our resources we continue to proactively reach out to our community, via our series ofand researcher-led projects, to increase understanding about their integrity-related training needs.  

What is a research integrity case?

Research integrity can cover a range of issues, and they can occur due to several reasons including: 

  • Honest, genuine error: Sometimes a researcher's intention was honest and ethical but either they, or another researcher, finds an error in the research. In these instances, a retraction or correction may be undertaken as appropriate, in some cases initiated by the authors themselves. 
  • Breach of integrity standards: 

    In other cases, it may be discovered that research has been carried out, or conclusions drawn, in an unethical way such as falsifying date, untrue authorship claims, plagiarism, image manipulation, or breaches of integrity related to professional codes of ethics, to name a few. This may also involve systematic targeting of journals and attempts to manipulate the editorial process. 

  • Paper mills: Commercial organisations selling authorship positions on illegitimate research, which is either entirely fabricated, contains fraudulent data, heavily plagiarised or otherwise unethical. 

What action is taken when a potential case is detected and investigated?

When a case is detected, our specialist integrity team: 

  • Undertake a thorough investigation following the Committee on Public Ethics (COPE) best practice guidelines 
  • Initiate post-publication peer review if required 
  • Liaise with authors, alongside institutions where appropriate. This can be protracted as authors require time to confer with colleagues and prepare detailed responses. External experts may be needed for the analysis of data or assessment other evidence.
  • Oversee every step to ensure consistency and provide ongoing support until the case is resolved.
  • Provide advice to the editor of the journal, with whom the responsibility for the final editorial decision lies.   

Cases can be small or large and can take varying lengths of time depending on their complexity.

How our Research Integrity Team works, and the process we follow when an issue has been detected on a manuscript.

Following a full investigation there are several active measures that can be taken when an integrity issue occurs: 

Corrections

These are issued to correct important errors made either by the author or journal that affect the scientific integrity of the published article, publication record, and or reputation of the authors or the journal, but do not undermine the conclusions of the study.  

Addendum

An addendum is generally published when significant additional information crucial to the reader’s understanding of the article has come to light following publication of the article. 

Matters Arising

Formal post-publication commentary on published papers can involve either challenges or clarifications of the published work and may, after peer review, be published online as Matters Arising, usually alongside a Reply from the original authors. These are peer reviewed and are only published if they meet the standards of publication as expected by the journal.  If the issues raised in the Matters Arising are considered substantial, they can lead to further action including a clarification statement, correction, Editorial Expression of Concern or retraction. 

Editor's Note

An Editor's Note is a notification alerting readers if the journal has initiated an inquiry in response to concerns raised about a published article. It is an online-only update, made only to the HTML version of record of the published article. It is not indexed. 

Editorial Expression of Concern (EEoC)

An Editorial Expression of Concern is a statement from the editors alerting readers to serious concerns affecting the integrity of the published paper. EEoCs are published online and are bidirectionally linked to the published paper. They receive a DOI and are indexed in major scholarly databases such as PubMed, Web of Science and Scopus.  EEoCs may be an interim measure or may be final.  

Publishing an Editor’s Note or EEoC is recommended by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) as a means of keeping readers updated while a potentially lengthy research integrity investigation is underway. Editor’s Notes and EEoCs are typically superseded by publishing another amendment―such as a correction or retraction―once the investigation is complete. 

Retraction

A retraction is designed to be a neutral tool to correct the literature. An article may be retracted when the integrity of the published work is substantially undermined and or there has been a divergence from research ethics. A retraction can be (and often is) initiated by authors themselves when they discover that something is amiss with their article. But ultimately retraction is always an editorial decision, often informed by advice and guidance from the publisher's research integrity group. This ensures that all retractions are executed in line with guidance given by industry bodies such as COPE (the Committee On Publication Ethics).