Misconduct in medical research: whose responsibility?
- PMID: 12680986
- DOI: 10.1046/j.1445-5994.2003.00373.x
Misconduct in medical research: whose responsibility?
Abstract
Abstract Examples of many types of misconduct in medical research continue to be reported. The true incidence is unknown because there is strong evidence of under-reporting as well as suggestions of increased detection. Risks to research participants may also be increasing, with contributing factors such as increased pressure on researchers to publish and to produce commercialization of their research. Institutions are perceived to typically respond slowly and inadequately to allegations of research misconduct. More could be done to try to prevent such mis-conduct, such as: (i) educating researchers about research ethics, (ii) assisting and protecting whistleblowers and (iii) instituting processes to adequately and promptly investigate and deal with allegations. In addition, a debate needs to take place as to whether research misconduct allegations should be dealt with at the institutional level or at a national level and whether medical boards should be routinely involved in the more serious breaches of ethical standards by medical practitioners engaged in research.
Comment in
-
Misconduct in medical research: ethics and democracy.Intern Med J. 2003 Apr;33(4):137-9. doi: 10.1046/j.1445-5994.2003.00372.x. Intern Med J. 2003. PMID: 12680978 No abstract available.
Similar articles
-
Improving biomedical journals' ethical policies: the case of research misconduct.J Med Ethics. 2014 Sep;40(9):644-6. doi: 10.1136/medethics-2013-101822. Epub 2014 Feb 6. J Med Ethics. 2014. PMID: 24505117
-
Canadian policy on reporting breaches of research integrity: When should Research Ethics Boards be informed?Account Res. 2019 Oct;26(7):460-471. doi: 10.1080/08989621.2019.1661243. Epub 2019 Aug 30. Account Res. 2019. PMID: 31462108 Review.
-
Evaluating U.S. medical schools' efforts to educate faculty researchers on research integrity and research misconduct policies and procedures.Account Res. 2014;21(1):9-25. doi: 10.1080/08989621.2013.822264. Account Res. 2014. PMID: 24073604
-
Responding to allegations of scientific misconduct: the procedure at the French National Medical and Health Research Institute.Sci Eng Ethics. 2000 Jan;6(1):41-8. doi: 10.1007/s11948-000-0021-3. Sci Eng Ethics. 2000. PMID: 11273435
-
Fraud and deceit in medical research.Br J Hosp Med (Lond). 2007 Oct;68(10):543-6. doi: 10.12968/hmed.2007.68.10.27325. Br J Hosp Med (Lond). 2007. PMID: 17974302 Review.
Cited by
-
Research misconduct and data fraud in clinical trials: prevalence and causal factors.Int J Clin Oncol. 2016 Feb;21(1):15-21. doi: 10.1007/s10147-015-0887-3. Epub 2015 Aug 20. Int J Clin Oncol. 2016. PMID: 26289019 Review.
-
Safeguarding good scientific practice in Europe.EMBO Rep. 2010 Apr;11(4):252-7. doi: 10.1038/embor.2010.32. Epub 2010 Mar 19. EMBO Rep. 2010. PMID: 20300117 Free PMC article.
-
Research Misconduct: A Report from a Developing Country.Iran J Public Health. 2017 Oct;46(10):1374-1378. Iran J Public Health. 2017. PMID: 29308381 Free PMC article.
-
The White Bull effect: abusive coauthorship and publication parasitism.J Med Ethics. 2005 Sep;31(9):554-6. doi: 10.1136/jme.2004.010553. J Med Ethics. 2005. PMID: 16131560 Free PMC article.
-
Experience and awareness of research integrity among Japanese physicians: a nationwide cross-sectional study.BMJ Open. 2021 Oct 21;11(10):e052351. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-052351. BMJ Open. 2021. PMID: 34675019 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical