Investigating allegations of research misconduct: the vital need for due process  Commentary: Response from members of the Griffiths inquiry

doi:10.1136/bmj.321.7263.752

BMJ 2000;321:752 ( 23 September )

Education and debate

Investigating allegations of research misconduct: the vital need for due process

Commentary: Response from members of the Griffiths inquiry

Investigating allegations of research misconduct: the vital need for due process

Edmund Hey, retired paediatrician ^b, Iain Chalmers, director ^a.

^a UK Cochrane Centre, Summertown Pavilion, Middle Way, Oxford OX2 7LG, ^b Newcastle upon Tyne

Correspondence to: I Chalmers ichalmers@cochrane.co.uk

The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below.

On 27 February 1999 the BMJ carried a news item reporting that the government had set up an inquiry into a controlled trialof neonatal ventilatory support undertaken at the North StaffordshireHospital, in Stoke on Trent, from 1990 to 1993.¹ The trialwas designed to assess whether continuous negative extrathoracicpressure (CNEP) ventilation could reduce the need for, and problemsassociated with, tracheal intubation and positive pressure ventilation.

Table Removed (Available Only in the Full Text)

Four years later the parents of one of the children treated with continuous negative extrathoracic pressure in the trial soughtadvice from a "neo-natal specialist"² about the likely aetiologyof their child's neurological problems. The local newspaper inStoke recently reported the mother's account of the consultationas follows: "The doctor examined [child's name] and then said,`What do you expect from experimental treatment?' I replied, $---$ `Whatexperimental treatment?' $---$ and that was the very first time we discovered[child's name] had taken part in . . . [Full text of this article]

CiteULike

Complore

Connotea

Del.icio.us Add to Digg

Digg

StumbleUpon Add to Technorati

Technorati What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

Gornall, J. (2008). Three doctors and a GMC prosecution. BMJ 337: a907-a907 [Full text]
Hey, E. (2006). The 1996 Continuous Negative Extrathoracic Pressure (CNEP) trial: were parents' allegations of research fraud fraudulent?. Pediatrics 117: 2244-2246 [Full text]
Samuels, M. P., Southall, D. P. (2006). Continuous negative extrathoracic pressure (CNEP) in neonatal respiratory failure: correction.. Pediatrics 117: 2332-2333 [Full text]
Harrison, J. E. (2005). Orthodontic Clinical Trials III: Reporting of ethical issues associated with clinical trials published in three orthodontic journals between 1989 and 1998. J. Orthod. 32: 115-121 [Abstract] [Full text]
Walshe, K., Shortell, S. M. (2004). When Things Go Wrong: How Health Care Organizations Deal With Major Failures. Health Aff (Millwood) 23: 103-111 [Abstract] [Full text]
Snowdon, C, Elbourne, D R, Garcia, J (2004). Perinatal pathology in the context of a clinical trial: a review of the literature. Arch. Dis. Child. Fetal Neonatal Ed. 89: F200-F203 [Abstract] [Full text]
Glasziou, P., Chalmers, I. (2004). Ethics review roulette: what can we learn?. BMJ 328: 121-122 [Full text]
Passmore, K, Leung, W-C (2002). Defensive practice among psychiatrists: a questionnaire survey. Postgrad. Med. J. 78: 671-673 [Abstract] [Full text]
Hey, E, Fleming, P, Sibert, J, Marcovitch, H (2002). Learning from the sad, sorry saga at Stoke. Arch. Dis. Child. 86: 1-3 [Full text]
Chalmers, I., Hey, E. (2001). Open letter to the chief medical officer. BMJ 323: 280-280 [Full text]
Sneyd, J.R. (2001). Editorial III: Lessons from Stafford. Br J Anaesth 86: 469-472 [Full text]
Stephenson, T., Henshall, C., Henshall, D., Wilkinson, A., Rennie, J., Wright, T., Lucking, K., Hall, D., Mellor, P., Morgan, B., Hey, E., Hey, E., Chalmers, I. (2000). Investigating allegations of research misconduct. BMJ 321: 1345-1345 [Full text]
Smith, R. (2000). Inquiring into inquiries. BMJ 321: 715-716 [Full text]

Rapid Responses:

Read all Rapid Responses

Investigating allegations of research misconduct: Carl Henshall, et al.
bmj.com, 25 Sep 2000 [Full text]
BAPM welcomes Hey and Chalmers analysis of the Griffiths report: Andrew Wilkinson, et al.
bmj.com, 25 Sep 2000 [Full text]
Credit where credit is due: Penny Mellor
bmj.com, 25 Sep 2000 [Full text]
The vital need for honesty: Mark Struthers
bmj.com, 25 Sep 2000 [Full text]
The real scandal is your attack on parents.: Brian Morgan
bmj.com, 26 Sep 2000 [Full text]
Trial by witch-hunt: G Wheatley
bmj.com, 26 Sep 2000 [Full text]
Speakers corner: John Hopkins
bmj.com, 25 Sep 2000 [Full text]
Re: Trial by witch-hunt: Brian Morgan
bmj.com, 27 Sep 2000 [Full text]
Okey dokey: John Hopkins
bmj.com, 28 Sep 2000 [Full text]
The whole truth: David Southall
bmj.com, 28 Sep 2000 [Full text]
Re: Re: Trial by witch-hunt: G Wheatley
bmj.com, 28 Sep 2000 [Full text]
Children are being denied CNEP as a result of this campaign: David Southall
bmj.com, 28 Sep 2000 [Full text]
time to learn the lessons from Stoke: David Hall
bmj.com, 28 Sep 2000 [Full text]
Re: time to START the Inquiries: Lisa Blakemore-Brown
bmj.com, 29 Sep 2000 [Full text]
Comment by Griffiths on the nurses in Stoke: Edmund Hey
bmj.com, 29 Sep 2000 [Full text]
Not Okey dokey: Brian Morgan
bmj.com, 29 Sep 2000 [Full text]
......and nothing but the truth so help me God: Penny Mellor
bmj.com, 29 Sep 2000 [Full text]
Are children really being denied CNEP as a result of a campaign?: Brian Morgan
bmj.com, 29 Sep 2000 [Full text]
The Griffiths Report - the worst outcome would be that it becomes increasingly difficult to do resea: Terence Stephenson
bmj.com, 29 Sep 2000 [Full text]
Support for and experience of nurses undertaking the CNEP trial: Teresa Wright, et al.
bmj.com, 29 Sep 2000 [Full text]
When you are in a hole, stop digging: John Hopkins
bmj.com, 30 Sep 2000 [Full text]
Do such Medical Ostriches really want a Speaker�s Corner?: Peter Morrell
bmj.com, 30 Sep 2000 [Full text]
Re: The Griffiths Report - the worst outcome would be that it becomes increasingly difficult to do r: Penny Mellor
bmj.com, 2 Oct 2000 [Full text]
Re: When you are in a hole, stop digging: Brian Morgan
bmj.com, 1 Oct 2000 [Full text]
Re: When you are in a hole, stop digging: Penny Mellor
bmj.com, 2 Oct 2000 [Full text]
Moving up the evolutionary ladder: John Hopkins
bmj.com, 2 Oct 2000 [Full text]
View from Sarajevo: Armin Alagic
bmj.com, 2 Oct 2000 [Full text]
Paranoid and Conspiracy-prone: G Wheatley
bmj.com, 2 Oct 2000 [Full text]
Re: Paranoid and Conspiracy-prone: Brian Morgan
bmj.com, 2 Oct 2000 [Full text]
Some facts please.: Mike Planigale
bmj.com, 3 Oct 2000 [Full text]
A journalists' ethics committee?: G Wheatley
bmj.com, 3 Oct 2000 [Full text]
Re: Re: Paranoid and Conspiracy-prone: Mark Cotton
bmj.com, 3 Oct 2000 [Full text]
Reconciliation and consent: John Hopkins
bmj.com, 3 Oct 2000 [Full text]
Re: Competence of the Griffiths Review: Brian Morgan
bmj.com, 4 Oct 2000 [Full text]
Wrong end of the stick?: Joe Kerr
bmj.com, 5 Oct 2000 [Full text]
Re: Some facts please.: Penny Mellor
bmj.com, 3 Oct 2000 [Full text]
Competence of the Griffiths Review: Ivor Rowlands
bmj.com, 3 Oct 2000 [Full text]
Re: Reconciliation and consent: Penny Mellor
bmj.com, 3 Oct 2000 [Full text]
Re: Reconciliation and consent: Brian Morgan
bmj.com, 3 Oct 2000 [Full text]
Repulsive distortions and overreactions: Peter Morrell
bmj.com, 4 Oct 2000 [Full text]
Fallacious arguments (continued).: Joseph Watine
bmj.com, 4 Oct 2000 [Full text]
Bullies on the web: John Hopkins
bmj.com, 5 Oct 2000 [Full text]
Calm that fevered brow: G Wheatley
bmj.com, 5 Oct 2000 [Full text]
As A Parent: Gloria Brown
bmj.com, 5 Oct 2000 [Full text]
Re: Calm that fevered brow: Penny Mellor
bmj.com, 7 Oct 2000 [Full text]
Re: Bullies on the web: Gerard Foxley
bmj.com, 7 Oct 2000 [Full text]
Re: Bullies on the web: Peter Morrell
bmj.com, 8 Oct 2000 [Full text]
What is the rapid response for ?: John Hopkins
bmj.com, 8 Oct 2000 [Full text]
So little value and respect for children: Charles Pragnell
bmj.com, 8 Oct 2000 [Full text]
Shouting at an empty room: John Hopkins
bmj.com, 9 Oct 2000 [Full text]
Re: Bullies on the web: Ian Nesbitt
bmj.com, 9 Oct 2000 [Full text]
The Griffiths Inquiry into research in Stoke on Trent failed to use due process: Edmund Hey, et al.
bmj.com, 9 Oct 2000 [Full text]
Re: The Griffiths Inquiry into research in Stoke on Trent failed to use due process: Brian Morgan
bmj.com, 10 Oct 2000 [Full text]
Re: Re: Reconciliation and consent: Mark Cotton
bmj.com, 11 Oct 2000 [Full text]
Re: "Doctors -v- Journalists": Paul Davison
bmj.com, 12 Oct 2000 [Full text]
Re: Re: "Doctors -v- Journalists": Brian Morgan
bmj.com, 12 Oct 2000 [Full text]
Re: The whole truth: E Dunn
bmj.com, 20 Oct 2000 [Full text]
Re: The Griffiths Inquiry into research in Stoke on Trent failed to use due process: Brian Morgan
bmj.com, 17 Oct 2000 [Full text]
Re: Re: Re: "Doctors -v- Journalists": Mark Cotton
bmj.com, 17 Oct 2000 [Full text]
Re: Re: Re: Re: "Doctors -v- Journalists": Brian Morgan
bmj.com, 19 Oct 2000 [Full text]
Further errors in Griffiths Report: Martin Samuels
bmj.com, 3 Nov 2000 [Full text]