Editorials

Time to face up to research misconduct

Every country that conducts scientific research experiences research misconduct. I can't support that statement with irrefutable evidence, but other countries that have looked for misconduct have found it.^{1 2} It would be strange if they did not find misconduct. Why should scientific research be the only human activity immune from crookery. Of the countries that conduct scientific research, only a minority--the United States, Denmark, Norway, Finland, Austria, and Australia--have a coherent system for tackling the problem. Other countries need a system for promoting scientific integrity, providing research into misconduct, and detecting, investigating and punishing misconduct when it does occur. We also need to study research misconduct, horrible as it might be, so that we can better understand its epidemiology.

Research misconduct is back on the British agenda after yet another case last week where the General Medical Council . . . [Full text of this article]

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    StumbleUpon    Technorati    What's this?

Relevant Articles

Misconduct in research

Herve Maisonneuve
BMJ 1996 313: 109. [Extract] [Full Text]

Profession must police itself

Peter Wilmshurst
BMJ 1996 313: 109. [Extract] [Full Text]

This article has been cited by other articles:

• Whellan, D. J., Ellis, S. J., Kraus, W. E., Hawthorne, K., Pina, I. L., Keteyian, S. J., Kitzman, D. W., Cooper, L., Lee, K., O'Connor, C. M. (2009). Method for Establishing Authorship in a Multicenter Clinical Trial. ANN INTERN MED 151: 414-420 [Abstract] [Full text]  
• Wainwright, P, Saunders, J (2004). What are local issues? The problem of the local review of research. J. Med. Ethics 30: 313-317 [Abstract] [Full text]  
• (2000). Managing Allegations of Scientific Misconduct: A Guidance Document for Editors. J Child Neurol 15: 609-613  
• Rennie, D., Evans, I., Farthing, M. J G, Chantler, C., Chantler, S., Riis, P. (1998). Dealing with research misconduct in the United Kingdom • An American perspective on research integrity • Conduct unbecoming---the MRC's approach • An editor's response to fraudsters • Deception: difficulties and initiatives • Honest advice from Denmark. BMJ 316: 1726-1733 [Full text]  
• RAJAGOPALAN, M (1998). Research misconduct and redundant publication. Gut 42: 448c-448 [Full text]  
• Campbell, D. (1997). Medicine needs its MI5. BMJ 315: 1677-1680 [Full text]  
• Smith, R. (1997). Misconduct in research: editors respond. BMJ 315: 201-202 [Full text]  
• Barker, A., Powell, R. A, Bhopal, R S, Rankin, J M, McColl, E, Stacy, R, Pearson, P H, Kaner, E F S, Thomas, L H, Vernon, B G, Rodgers, H (1997). Authorship. BMJ 314: 1046-1046 [Full text]  
• Vollmann, J., Winau, R. (1996). Informed consent in human experimentation before the Nuremberg code. BMJ 313: 1445-1447 [Full text]  
• Goodare, H. (1996). Patients' consent should have been sought. BMJ 313: 361a-361 [Full text]  
• Maisonneuve, H. (1996). Misconduct in research. BMJ 313: 109-109 [Full text]  
• Wilmshurst, P. (1996). Profession must police itself. BMJ 313: 109a-109 [Full text]  
• Winterton, N. (1996). Medical Research Council is setting up rigorous procedures. BMJ 313: 109b-109 [Full text]