Analytical Methods in the Quality Control of Scientific Publications Part II: The Authors’, Reviewers’, Editors’ Responsibility, and the Publishers’ Authority

摘要

Publication of scientific documents as research reports and original papers has an important place in displaying the authors’ knowledge, integrity, responsibility, and honesty. The same is true for the reviewers and editors. The authority of a publisher strongly depends on the qualifications of the experts who review the manuscripts, and the recommendations they provide to the authors and editors. The honesty of the authors, reviewers, and editors is of the utmost importance. The author of the paper titled “Analytical Methods in Quality Control of Scientific Publications”, which was published in theAmerican Journal of Analytical Chemistry, 2012, 3, 443-447 (DOI: 10.4236/ajac.2012.36058) had criticized the paper published by Dongreet al., “Application of GC-EI-MS for the Identification and Investigation of Positional Isomer in Primaquine, an Antimalarial Drug, ”Journal of Pharmaceutical and Biomedical Analysis, 2005, 39, 111-116 (DOI: 10.1016/j.jpba.2005.03.019), for presenting falsifications in this publication. Neither the reviewer northe Edi-tor-in-Chief Bezhan Chankvetadze of the Journal of Pharmaceutical and Biomedical Analysishas reacted to accusations of falsification. If a reviewer and editor are poorly qualified, unprincipled, or even corrupt, as was suggested by Bob Grant inThe Scientistmagazine (http://www.the-scientist.com/display/55679/#ixzz0mmsPoMIS), it is not good enough to consider simply that the publisher / journal has a high ranking and is indexed in PubMed or the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI). In this editorial, we report a profound misunderstanding oralack of knowledge by the authors Shixue G., Zhuoyu L., and Wei W., in their paper published in ZhongguoYaoye China Pharmaceuticals, Vol. 14, No. 4, 2005, pp. 36-37 and a similar lack of professionalism by reviewers and editors. The influence and the role of internationally used pharmacopeias, such as The British Pharmacopoeia, European Pharmacopoeia, The United States Pharmacopeial Convention, and United States Pharmacopeia are shown as the main initiators and drivers of these misunderstandings.