Safeguarding scientific integrity: A case study in examining manipulation in the peer review process

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.Our study is limited by a few factors including: difficulty collecting peer reviewer data, potentially missing affiliations, and a small sample without comparisons. While this is a case study of one special issue, we do have suggestions for increasing integrity.

Automated summary

This study analyzes the expertise, conflicts of interest, and objectivity of editors, authors, and peer reviewers involved in a special journal issue on fertility, pregnancy, and mental health. The study reveals undisclosed conflicts of interest among some authors, editors, and peer reviewers, which compromises objectivity. The lack of transparency undermines the peer review process and allows for biased research and dissemination of misinformation.