[What can we learn from the Scott Reuben case? Scientific misconduct in anaesthesiology]
- PMID: 19902152
- DOI: 10.1007/s00101-009-1637-6
[What can we learn from the Scott Reuben case? Scientific misconduct in anaesthesiology]
Abstract
In February 2009 a major case of scientific misconduct was discovered. The American pain researcher Dr. S. Reuben had published 21 papers over a period of 15 years that were found to be fraudulent. Suddenly many advances in postoperative pain therapy which had been assumed to be correct seemed questionable. In this review article the lessons which can be learnt from this case are described. This review also reveals that it is almost impossible for reviewers or readers of scientific journals to detect scientific fraud. However, several warning signs can be identified that might be useful when reading clinical papers. In retrospect many of these signs were detectable in Reuben's studies. Based on the fraudulent papers of Reuben it will be shown how and to what extent falsified results can affect other types of literature, such as practice guidelines, meta-analyses, review articles and oral presentations.
Similar articles
-
Perpetuation of Retracted Publications Using the Example of the Scott S. Reuben Case: Incidences, Reasons and Possible Improvements.Sci Eng Ethics. 2016 Aug;22(4):1063-1072. doi: 10.1007/s11948-015-9680-y. Epub 2015 Jul 7. Sci Eng Ethics. 2016. PMID: 26150092
-
Susceptibility to fraud in systematic reviews: lessons from the Reuben case.Anesthesiology. 2009 Dec;111(6):1279-89. doi: 10.1097/ALN.0b013e3181c14c3d. Anesthesiology. 2009. PMID: 19934873
-
[Fraudulent pain research: a hurt so deep nothing can alleviate it].Rev Esp Anestesiol Reanim. 2009 Jun-Jul;56(6):372-9. doi: 10.1016/s0034-9356(09)70410-4. Rev Esp Anestesiol Reanim. 2009. PMID: 19725345 Spanish.
-
Enhancing reproducibility: Failures from Reproducibility Initiatives underline core challenges.Biochem Pharmacol. 2017 Aug 15;138:7-18. doi: 10.1016/j.bcp.2017.04.008. Epub 2017 Apr 8. Biochem Pharmacol. 2017. PMID: 28396196 Review.
-
Scientific authorship. Part 1. A window into scientific fraud?Mutat Res. 2005 Jan;589(1):17-30. doi: 10.1016/j.mrrev.2004.07.003. Mutat Res. 2005. PMID: 15652224 Review.
Cited by
-
[Original scientific articles: conception, accomplishment and publication].Anaesthesist. 2011 Jan;60(1):5-7. doi: 10.1007/s00101-010-1844-1. Anaesthesist. 2011. PMID: 21243326 German. No abstract available.
-
Visibility of retractions: a cross-sectional one-year study.BMC Res Notes. 2013 Jun 19;6:238. doi: 10.1186/1756-0500-6-238. BMC Res Notes. 2013. PMID: 23782596 Free PMC article.
-
Perpetuation of Retracted Publications Using the Example of the Scott S. Reuben Case: Incidences, Reasons and Possible Improvements.Sci Eng Ethics. 2016 Aug;22(4):1063-1072. doi: 10.1007/s11948-015-9680-y. Epub 2015 Jul 7. Sci Eng Ethics. 2016. PMID: 26150092
-
Do nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs affect bone healing? A critical analysis.ScientificWorldJournal. 2012;2012:606404. doi: 10.1100/2012/606404. Epub 2012 Jan 4. ScientificWorldJournal. 2012. PMID: 22272177 Free PMC article. Review.
-
[Scientific fraud. When researchers become forgers].Anaesthesist. 2009 Dec;58(12):1197-8. doi: 10.1007/s00101-009-1647-4. Anaesthesist. 2009. PMID: 19921478 German. No abstract available.
References
Publication types
MeSH terms
Personal name as subject
- Actions
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources