Dr Paul McCrory, a leading neurologist who stepped down as chair from a prestigious international sports concussion organisation last month, is facing fresh plagiarism allegations that have widened the scope of an already contentious issue. An investigation has revealed that at least 10 more of his published articles contain substantial amounts of unattributed material.
Data analyst Nick Brown's analysis of Dr McCrory's work, spanning from 2002 to present day, suggests a pattern of plagiarism across multiple publications in top-tier journals. The British Journal of Sports Medicine retracted one of his editorials in 2005 after citing an "unlawful and indefensible breach of copyright" by Professor Steve Haake.
Initially, Dr McCrory attributed the retraction to a technical glitch that led to the publication of an unfinished draft. However, he acknowledged responsibility for the error and indicated he would review other articles from the same period. He has since requested the retraction of another article from the same journal due to similar reasons.
The new allegations, which Dr McCrory has yet to address publicly, have raised questions about the integrity of research in sports concussion. The Concussion in Sport Group (CISG), for which he served as chair, receives funding from major sporting bodies such as the International Olympic Committee and FIFA.
Dr McCrory's involvement in developing the widely used Sport Concussion Assessment Tool has also been brought under scrutiny. His research on concussion policies, including a statement describing concussion among NFL players as "overblown," has sparked debate about the accuracy of expert advice in this critical field.
The situation follows recent groundbreaking research from the Australian Sports Brain Bank highlighting chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE) in over half of donor brains, including those under 35. The integrity of concussion research and expert guidance is paramount given its significant health implications for athletes.
Dr McCrory has acknowledged that his mistakes were not deliberate but constituted plagiarism nonetheless. He mentioned a third article where typesetting issues led to the omission of quotation marks and incorrect placement of references. The ongoing scrutiny underscores the importance of academic rigour and ethical conduct in scientific publishing, particularly in high-stakes areas like concussion research.