The Journal of Heart and Lung Transplantation (JHLT) has opted not to retract a controversial study published in November 2024, despite it violating the journal’s ethics policy. The study involved two patients who received organ transplants in China, raising concerns about the procurement of organs from executed prisoners—a practice widely criticized for its ethical implications.
The Study and Its Implications
The paper, titled “Long-term outcomes of a novel fully magnetically levitated ventricular assist device for the treatment of advanced heart failure in China,” discusses a new mechanical circulatory support device. It was initially accepted and published without recognizing the ethical violation. The study has since been cited twice.
JHLT’s ethics policy, established in 2022, prohibits publishing data on human organ transplants from countries like China, where unethical organ procurement practices have been documented.
Editorial Response
After a “lengthy debate,” the journal’s editors decided against retracting the paper, citing its scientific validity. Editor-in-Chief Joseph Rogers stated, “We didn’t want to convey to the readership that there was something scientifically invalid about the paper.” Instead, JHLT published two editorials acknowledging the oversight and committing to stronger safeguards to prevent future violations.
Strengthened Safeguards
Going forward, JHLT has introduced additional measures:
- All submissions involving human organ transplants in China will be desk-rejected by the editor-in-chief.
- Peer reviewers, who are not required to read the journal’s ethics statement, will have limited responsibility in identifying such ethical issues.
- The journal has emphasized its internal failure and has reassured authors that the issue lies in its processes, not the scientific merit of their work.
Reflection on Ethical Oversight
The journal admitted that if the ethical breach had been identified earlier, the paper would not have been published. Rogers emphasized that the incident underscores the importance of robust internal checks and balances in scholarly publishing.
Original Story Link: Retraction Watch