Meet our research integrity experts: Sarah Jenkins

Fifteen years ago, when Sarah Jenkins opens in new tab/window was working as a Publisher and Publishing Director, managing allegations of ethical misconduct was a relatively straightforward part of the job. “Cases were simpler in nature, relating mostly to authorial misconduct,” she recalled.

Today, the scenario is very different. “Unethical behavior can occur at many different stages within the research and editorial process,” Sarah said. “And what we’re seeing is that it is increasingly intentionally hidden from us by the actors who are participating in that misconduct.”

Cases of concern to research integrity specialists rear their head at every stage of the publishing process, from errors of judgment or fabrication of data and images, to manipulation of the peer-review process to influence the editorial decision or artificially inflate publication and citation metrics for personal gain.

The current publishing ethics landscape

Systematic manipulation of the editorial process by paper mills or other coordinated networks of bad actors can quickly result in an investigation into thousands of research papers and lead to the retraction of hundreds — a figure that used to represent an entire year’s worth of retractions until recently. The cause of the increase is twofold: a rise in fraud in recent years and advancements in our investigative tools, allowing us to detect fraud and misconduct more effectively than ever before.

“When we start to dig into these cases, rather than just having a single allegation that we can resolve and then correct the scientific record for, we’re seeing multiple strands around these allegations,” Sarah explained. “That in turn means our investigations are taking a lot longer than they were perhaps five to 10 years ago, and it therefore can take longer to correct the scientific record.”

The scale of manipulation behind some problematic papers is another difficulty, as this can reveal large networks of bad actors that all need to be investigated. While technology plays a major role in detecting and investigating bad actors, technology — and increasingly AI — can be used malevolently to systematically manipulate research.

“The nature and scale of cases are increasingly putting Elsevier — and the publishing community — into the spotlight,” said Sarah. “As publishers, we need to detect potential fraud or unethical behaviors before publication to prevent unethical research entering the record, as well as resolve cases that are identified after publication efficiently and transparently.”

Building a strong foundation for detection

The complexity of publishing ethics cases requires specialized investigative skills as well as new technology and resources to navigate these challenges effectively. A growing team with diverse expertise and a strong commitment to protect research integrity is in place at Elsevier, backed by new and powerful technology that is constantly evolving. The team, established in 2013 and known as the Research Integrity & Publishing Ethics Center of Expertise, has been led by Sarah since January 2023.

The investigative team supports publishers and journal editors with investigation and resolution of all allegations of ethical misconduct in our published content. The newly formed pre-publication screening team complements traditional editorial evaluation and peer review processes by using technology, robust guidelines and a range of their own individually honed talents to detect unethical practices at multiple points between submission and proof correction. “There is an urgent need for vigilance in the publishing process to prevent the publication of fraudulent papers from entering into the scientific literature at all,” Sarah said.

Access to the right technology that can identify potential signals of misconduct at scale allows the team to conduct investigations, identify problematic papers and the networks behind them, screen manuscripts and detect changing behaviors or identify new threats prior to publication.

The development of Elsevier’s homegrown and targeted technology is a particular source of pride to Sarah. “We’ve grown and developed our technology so we can now take a more proactive approach toward safeguarding the scientific record,” she said. Constant feedback between human expertise and technology is a critical part of the process. “We need to continuously learn,” said Sarah.

Raising awareness of the challenges to research integrity and how they are evolving among all stakeholders, including editors, authors and reviewers as well as external actors and institutions, is a key long-term priority. To this end, the policy, outreach and engagement team is tasked with sharing learnings, technology and expertise with the research integrity community, reviewing policies and publishing ethics guidelines and educating stakeholders about emerging trends.

Monitoring and leading developments

With such a diverse range of fields to monitor, it comes as no surprise that Sarah’s daily schedule is full and varied. Within the Center of Expertise, she advises on the development of pre-publication screening technologies and robust guidelines, consolidates the critical feedback loop between colleagues, and oversees retractions with the legal team for policy compliance.

For Elsevier’s leadership teams, Sarah advises on research integrity trends in the industry and in Elsevier journals to facilitate informed decision-making. She also reviews policy development, works with STM committees, and presents thought leadership pieces at conferences as part of her commitment to this crucial area of work.

Community-wide action to safeguard research integrity

One key to success is building recognition of shared responsibility across the entire research community of authors, reviewers, editors, readers, publishers, society partners, institutes opens in new tab/window, funding bodies and governments. This solidarity is already present and is growing, Sarah said. For example, in commitment to quality and trusted partnership, Elsevier developed and shared a new technology with the STM Integrity Hub that helps detect duplicate manuscript submissions across journals and publishing houses.

“The means of manipulation will continue to evolve, but what has changed and will continue to become stronger is shared responsibility across the community and the need for us to all work together,” Sarah said. “While we expect this to get more challenging before it gets easier, we are investing in the right people and tools to safeguard the integrity of the scientific record.”