1 The retractions came only a few months after BioMed Central.

There are several lessons to be learned from these cases of peer-review and peer-reviewer fraud. One is usually that the digital manuscript-handling systems that most journals use are as susceptible to exploitation and hacking as additional data systems. Chen and Moon, for instance, both abused an attribute of ScholarOne: the e-mail messages sent to scholars inviting them to examine a manuscript include log-in information, and whoever receives those messages can indication into the system. Most other electronic manuscript submission systems possess similar loopholes that may easily be hacked. The most crucial lesson is that incentives work. This pressure exists almost but is particularly intense in China everywhere.If special notes from GPs aren’t being utilized for these individuals, visiting OOH doctors are likely to be faced with a new situation with no information or suggestions to greatly help them manage the individual. As a few of these doctors may not be acquainted with local services, there is a danger that those patients with complex needs might be admitted, and that this admission might be to an inappropriate assistance, or against the express desires of the family and patient. The analysis also highlights the lack of detailed statistics obtainable about palliative care patients using OOH services and suggests that health professionals could better catch these data in future. The authors recommend a particular dedicated form for GPs to send to NHS24 with complete information about palliative care patients.