Has anyone ever had a copyeditor change their results?
Mine appears to have (presumably accidentally) done a "find-replace" with numbers. Odds Ratios of 1 became odds ratios of 50, etc. Virtually every number was wrong. I alerted them to this and they still put it online as "in press" with those problems still present while they work on fixing. Following a series of increasingly terse emails where I told them to take it down until it was corrected and they refuse because "It is their policy to publish articles as quickly as possible and readers understand this is still temporary", I receive a nastygram for the editor about my tone towards journal staff. (Note: worst I said was referencing a "bungled attempt at copyediting").
This is a completely legit (NOT open access), mid-tier journal. Editor is a senior professor at UCLA. Its a common outlet for large-scale health services research and I'd wager I'm not the only one here who has published in that journal.
I've agreed to drop it for the sake of my co-author who is more socially integrated into this area, but must admit I was sorely tempted to escalate. Its not a journal I'm likely to publish in again (especially after this experience) and would not otherwise mind calling this person out on something like this despite their relative stature. However, am I wrong in thinking this is an extremely abnormal copyediting problem that warrants a stronger reaction than "Oh well"? Not thrilled that something with wildly inaccurate results is now readily accessible via google scholar...even if temporary. Especially given the increased attention to retractions and the incredible regulatory burdens that means I'm working extra hours to make sure my techs are initialing the source documents correctly and other mundane nonsense. Seeing this treated so cavalierly irritates me to no end...
Mine appears to have (presumably accidentally) done a "find-replace" with numbers. Odds Ratios of 1 became odds ratios of 50, etc. Virtually every number was wrong. I alerted them to this and they still put it online as "in press" with those problems still present while they work on fixing. Following a series of increasingly terse emails where I told them to take it down until it was corrected and they refuse because "It is their policy to publish articles as quickly as possible and readers understand this is still temporary", I receive a nastygram for the editor about my tone towards journal staff. (Note: worst I said was referencing a "bungled attempt at copyediting").
This is a completely legit (NOT open access), mid-tier journal. Editor is a senior professor at UCLA. Its a common outlet for large-scale health services research and I'd wager I'm not the only one here who has published in that journal.
I've agreed to drop it for the sake of my co-author who is more socially integrated into this area, but must admit I was sorely tempted to escalate. Its not a journal I'm likely to publish in again (especially after this experience) and would not otherwise mind calling this person out on something like this despite their relative stature. However, am I wrong in thinking this is an extremely abnormal copyediting problem that warrants a stronger reaction than "Oh well"? Not thrilled that something with wildly inaccurate results is now readily accessible via google scholar...even if temporary. Especially given the increased attention to retractions and the incredible regulatory burdens that means I'm working extra hours to make sure my techs are initialing the source documents correctly and other mundane nonsense. Seeing this treated so cavalierly irritates me to no end...
