CliniGA CRO

CliniGA CRO Blog

Post-Publication Errors: Taking Corrections Beyond the Internal File

Assess post-publication errors and coordinate corrections through the journal’s appropriate editorial process.

Representative research photograph: Post-Publication Errors: Taking Corrections Beyond the Internal File
Photo: Bill Branson (Photographer) · License: Public domain · Cropped and resized.
Published
Updated

Finding an error after publication is not resolved by correcting a local document alone. The public version, supplementary files and related outputs need to be addressed through an appropriate publication process so readers can identify what changed and why.

The publication decision

Record the suspected error, how it was found and the results it may affect. A numeric correction, mistaken label and error changing interpretation can require different assessment. Relevant authors and experts review impact and contact the journal through its correction process. The internal team should not act as though it alone determines the editorial action.

Worked example

For example, two supplementary table headings were exchanged. The team verifies the correct source tables, assesses whether interpretation is affected and provides the journal with a clear explanation. It also considers institutional copies, press materials and presentations containing the same error. Earlier version evidence is not removed without explanation.

Coordination checks

  • Identify affected text, tables and supplementary material.
  • Link journal communication with authorised scientific impact assessment.
  • Check institutional copies and links when a correction becomes public.

Acceptance and boundaries

Acceptance means the issue follows the appropriate editorial route and readers can understand the relationship between the correction and current version. This recommendation does not prescribe identical action for every mistake. Impact and journal assessment guide the route. While a suspicion is being investigated, avoid announcing unverified allegations or conclusions as established fact; keep confirmed information clearly distinguished.

Frequently asked questions

Is replacing an internal PDF sufficient?
No. Public versions and related outputs need attention through the appropriate journal process.
Does every mistake require retraction?
No. Impact assessment and editorial procedures determine the suitable correction route.

Sources

  1. ICMJE — Corrections and version control
  2. EMA — ICH E3 structure and content of clinical study reports