Retraction and/or Corrections
Authors are discouraged from withdrawing submitted manuscripts after it is in the publication process (review, copyedit, layout, etc.,). During the time, FOCUS had spent valuable resources besides time spent in the process.
FOCUS editors shall consider retracting a publication if:
• They have clear evidence that the findings are unreliable, either as a result of a major error (eg, miscalculation or experimental error) or as a result of fabrication (eg, of data) or falsification (eg, image manipulation);
• It constitutes plagiarism;
• The findings have previously been published elsewhere without proper attribution to previous sources or disclosure to the editor, permission to republish, or justification (ie, cases of redundant publication);
• It contains material or data without authorization for use;
• Copyright has been infringed or there is some other serious legal issue (eg, libel, privacy);
• It reports unethical research;
• It has been published solely based on a compromised or manipulated peer review process;
• The author(s) failed to disclose a major competing interest (a.k.a. conflict of interest) that, in the view of the editor, would have unduly affected interpretations of the work or recommendations by editors and peer reviewers.
Notices of retraction would:
• Be linked to the retracted article wherever possible (ie, in all online versions);
• Clearly identify the retracted article (eg, by including the title and authors in the retraction heading or citing the retracted article);
• Be clearly identified as a retraction (ie, distinct from other types of correction or comment);
• Be published promptly to minimize the harmful effects;
• Be freely available to all readers (ie, not behind access barriers or available only to subscribers);
• State who is retracting the article;
• State the reason(s) for retraction;
• Be objective, factual and avoid inflammatory language
Retractions are not usually appropriate if:
• The authorship is disputed but there is no reason to doubt the validity of the findings;
• The main findings of the work are still reliable and correction could sufficiently address errors or concerns;
• An editor has inconclusive evidence to support retraction or is awaiting additional information such as from an institutional investigation;
• Author conflicts of interest have been reported to the journal after publication, but in the editor’s view, these are not likely to have influenced interpretations or recommendations or the conclusions of the article.
FOCUS editors shall consider issuing an expression of concern if:
• they receive inconclusive evidence of research or publication misconduct by the authors;
• there is evidence that the findings are unreliable but the authors’ institution will not investigate the case;
• they believe that an investigation into alleged misconduct related to the publication either has not been or would not be, fair and impartial, or conclusive;
• an investigation is underway but a judgment will not be available for a considerable time
FOCUS editors shall consider issuing a correction if:
• a small portion of an otherwise reliable publication proves to be misleading (especially because of honest error);
• the author/contributor list is incorrect (i.e. a deserving author has been omitted or somebody who does not meet authorship criteria has been included).
The mechanism follows the guidelines from the COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics).