. 2020 Sep 17;5:13. doi: 10.1186/s41073-020-00099-8

Table 1.

Possible outcomes and problems of reporting inaccurate citations using current methods

Method	Possible outcomes	Problems
1. Contacting the editor	• Publication of a corrigendum • No correction, editor contacting authors with a note to be more careful in the future • Being ignored	• Burdensome for the reporter and the editoral team • Impractical to do for every single inaccuracy
2. Submission of a commentary/letter	• Acceptance of commentary/letter and publication of a corrigendum • Acceptance of commentary/letter and publication of a response commentary/letter by the citing authors in reaction to the first letter with/without the publication of a corrigendum • Acceptance of commentary/letter without any further response from the citing authors, or reaction from the editors • Rejection of the commentary/letter	• Burdensome for the reporter and the editorial team • Impractical to do for every single inaccuracy
3. Email corresponding authors	• Submission of a corrigendum by authors and having the inaccuracy corrected • Submission of a corrigendum and having it rejected by the editors • Being ignored	• The reporter may remain out of the communication loop • The inaccuracy may never be reported to the journal
4. Post on social media	• Submission of a corrigendum by authors and having it corrected • Submission of a corrigendum and having it rejected by the editors • Being ignored • Having the comment deleted	• Complicated to distinguish genuine report from trolls • Comments can be deleted by account owners • Scientists who are not on social media will not be aware of it • Exposure to non-experts
5. Use PubPeer	• Editors of the journals with a paid subscription will get a notification. They may react with/without a corrigendum, or ignore the report • Citing authors act on the reported inaccuracy and submit a corrigendum which may be accepted or rejected • Citing authors ignore the report • Other researchers including the citing/cited authors may make further comments or ignore it altogether	• Prose comments do not appear in the text • Comments are not linked to citations • Cited authors are not notified • Not fully open and free for all users • Possible to make anonymous comments
6. Current annotation platforms	• Editors of the journals who wish to be informed will get a notification. They may react with/without a corrigendum, or ignore the report • Citing authors act on the reported inaccuracy and submit a corrigendum which may be accepted or rejected • Citing authors ignore the report • Other researchers including the citing/cited authors may make further comments or ignore it altogether	• Comments are not visible across platforms • Comments are not linked to citations • Cited authors are not notified • Not possible to create an index of inaccurate citations

Method

Possible outcomes

Problems

1. Contacting the editor

• Publication of a corrigendum

• No correction, editor contacting authors with a note to be more careful in the future

• Being ignored

• Burdensome for the reporter and the editoral team

• Impractical to do for every single inaccuracy

2. Submission of a commentary/letter

• Acceptance of commentary/letter and publication of a corrigendum

• Acceptance of commentary/letter and publication of a response commentary/letter by the citing authors in reaction to the first letter with/without the publication of a corrigendum

• Acceptance of commentary/letter without any further response from the citing authors, or reaction from the editors

• Rejection of the commentary/letter

• Burdensome for the reporter and the editorial team

• Impractical to do for every single inaccuracy

3. Email corresponding authors

• Submission of a corrigendum by authors and having the inaccuracy corrected

• Submission of a corrigendum and having it rejected by the editors

• Being ignored

• The reporter may remain out of the communication loop

• The inaccuracy may never be reported to the journal

4. Post on social media

• Submission of a corrigendum by authors and having it corrected

• Submission of a corrigendum and having it rejected by the editors

• Being ignored

• Having the comment deleted

• Complicated to distinguish genuine report from trolls

• Comments can be deleted by account owners

• Scientists who are not on social media will not be aware of it

• Exposure to non-experts

5. Use PubPeer

• Editors of the journals with a paid subscription will get a notification. They may react with/without a corrigendum, or ignore the report

• Citing authors act on the reported inaccuracy and submit a corrigendum which may be accepted or rejected

• Citing authors ignore the report

• Other researchers including the citing/cited authors may make further comments or ignore it altogether

• Prose comments do not appear in the text

• Comments are not linked to citations

• Cited authors are not notified

• Not fully open and free for all users

• Possible to make anonymous comments

6. Current annotation platforms

• Editors of the journals who wish to be informed will get a notification. They may react with/without a corrigendum, or ignore the report

• Citing authors act on the reported inaccuracy and submit a corrigendum which may be accepted or rejected

• Citing authors ignore the report

• Other researchers including the citing/cited authors may make further comments or ignore it altogether

• Comments are not visible across platforms

• Comments are not linked to citations

• Cited authors are not notified

• Not possible to create an index of inaccurate citations