Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Fake peer review - too good to be true
  1. Bernard M Y Cheung
  1. Correspondence to Professor Bernard M Y Cheung, Department of Medicine, University of Hong Kong, Queen Mary Hospital, Hong Kong, China; mycheung{at}

Statistics from

Academic fraud and research misconduct can manifest in many ways. In the olden days, we tend to think of research misconduct as falsifying or fabrication of data, or copying from other publications, including the author's own previous or simultaneous publications. In recent years, academic fraud has taken a more sophisticated turn.

In Postgraduate Medical Journal (PMJ), Qi et al reported on retractions related to faked peer reviews.1 In these incidents, the peer reviews were not genuine. The reviewers in these cases appeared to be real independent academics, but were in reality either the authors and associates using other names and e-mail addresses, or persons named by the authors who were not genuine academic referees. …

View Full Text


  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Provenance and peer review Commissioned; internally peer reviewed.

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Linked Articles