scholarly journals Important Topics for Fostering Research Integrity by Research Performing and Research Funding Organizations: A Delphi Consensus Study

2021 ◽  
Vol 27 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Krishma Labib ◽  
Rea Roje ◽  
Lex Bouter ◽  
Guy Widdershoven ◽  
Natalie Evans ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Research Funding ◽  
Research Policy ◽  
Conflicts Of Interest ◽  
Research Integrity ◽  
Research Process ◽  
Survey Study ◽  
Delphi Consensus ◽  
Comprehensive Overview ◽  
Responsible Research ◽  
Preventative Approach

AbstractTo foster research integrity (RI), it is necessary to address the institutional and system-of-science factors that influence researchers’ behavior. Consequently, research performing and research funding organizations (RPOs and RFOs) could develop comprehensive RI policies outlining the concrete steps they will take to foster RI. So far, there is no consensus on which topics are important to address in RI policies. Therefore, we conducted a three round Delphi survey study to explore which RI topics to address in institutional RI policies by seeking consensus from research policy experts and institutional leaders. A total of 68 RPO and 52 RFO experts, representing different disciplines, countries and genders, completed one, two or all rounds of the study. There was consensus among the experts on the importance of 12 RI topics for RPOs and 11 for RFOs. The topics that ranked highest for RPOs concerned education and training, supervision and mentoring, dealing with RI breaches, and supporting a responsible research process (e.g. through quality assurance). The highest ranked RFO topics concerned dealing with breaches of RI, conflicts of interest, and setting expectations on RPOs (e.g. about educating researchers about RI). Together with the research policy experts and institutional leaders, we developed a comprehensive overview of topics important for inclusion in the RI policies of RPOs and RFOs. The topics reflect preference for a preventative approach to RI, coupled with procedures for dealing with RI breaches. RPOs and RFOs should address each of these topics in order to support researchers in conducting responsible research.

scholarly journals Important topics for fostering research integrity by research performing and research funding organizations – A Delphi consensus study

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Krishma Labib ◽  
Rea Scepanovic ◽  
Lex Bouter ◽  
Guy Widdershoven ◽  
Natalie Evans ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Delphi Study ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Research Policy ◽  
Conflicts Of Interest ◽  
Research Integrity ◽  
Research Process ◽  
Delphi Consensus ◽  
Comprehensive Overview ◽  
Delphi Studies ◽  
Preventative Approach

Background: To foster research integrity (RI), it is necessary to address the institutional and system-of-science factors that influence researchers’ behavior. Consequently, research performing and research funding organizations (RPOs and RFOs) should develop RI promotion plans (RIPPs) outlining the concrete steps they will take to foster RI. So far, there is no consensus on which topics are important to address in RIPPs. This study aimed to explore which RI topics to address in RIPPs by seeking consensus from research policy experts and institutional leaders. Additionally, we aimed to rank the identified RI topics in priority. Methods: We employed a three round Delphi study to reach our objectives. Delphi studies include a series (‘rounds’) of questionnaires. To achieve consensus, results are fed back to respondents between subsequent rounds. In Round 1, we asked research policy experts to rate the importance of RI topics on a 1-5 scale. In Round 2, they were asked to rank the topics, which received consensus on importance, in order of priority to be included in RIPPs. In Round 3, experts were asked to provide answers to open-ended questions about the rationale behind the rankings in the previous round.Results: A total of 68 RPO and 52 RFO experts, representing different disciplines, countries and genders, completed one, two or all rounds of the Delphi study. There was consensus among the experts on the importance of 12 RI topics for RPOs and 11 for RFOs (67% agreement on ratings 4-5). The topics that ranked highest for RPOs concerned education and training, supervision and mentoring, supporting a responsible research process (e.g. through quality assurance), and dealing with RI breaches. The highest ranked RFO topics concerned dealing with breaches of RI, conflicts of interest and setting expectations on RPOs (e.g. about educating researchers about RI).Conclusions: Together with research policy experts and institutional leaders, we developed a comprehensive overview of topics important for inclusion in RIPPs of RPOs and RFOs. The topics reflect a clear preference for a preventative approach to RI, coupled with fair procedures for dealing with RI breaches. Study pre-registration: https://osf.io/saj4u

scholarly journals 10.B. Workshop: Corporate influence on science – what is happening and what can be done?

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (Supplement_5) ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Keyword(s):  
Fossil Fuels ◽  
Conflicts Of Interest ◽  
Research Process ◽  
Policy Outcomes ◽  
Policy And Practice ◽  
Industry Funding ◽  
Corporate Influence ◽  
Pharmaceutical Industries ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Funding Research

Abstract The role of the corporate sector in research sponsorship is growing. So too is the evidence that corporations whose products are potentially damaging to health or the environment influence science and the ways in which science is used in policy and practice. Such efforts are a key part of corporate attempts to maintain or increase the consumption or use of industry products, and to secure favourable policy outcomes. The products and practices of corporations are responsible for a growing proportion of the global disease burden. Non-communicable diseases, many driven by consumption of unhealthy commodities and exposure to chemicals, account for over 73 percent of global deaths. It is increasingly important to understand the complex and multifaceted ways corporations seek to influence science; the impact these strategies have; and the ways this influence can be addressed. This workshop brings together global experts to explore these issues. Drawing on examples from several industries (e.g. tobacco, alcohol, food, and pharmaceuticals), it aims to: Increase understanding of the ways corporations whose products are potentially damaging to health influence science. We present a newly developed, evidence-based typology which draws together the vast existing literature in this field, to present a simplified way of understanding corporate influence on science. Delegates will be provided with materials that provide a means for recognising such influence.Examine the influence that corporations have on the first stage in the research process - research agendas. We present examples from tobacco, food and pharmaceutical industries which illustrate the mechanism through which industry funding of science drives researchers to study questions that are favourable to industry. The desired outcome is to maximise research on the benefits of industry products (positioning these products as solutions to complex problems), minimise research on the harms of their products, support their policy and legal positions, and impede potential regulation of their products.Increase awareness of the involvement that corporations have had in altering the mechanisms though which science is used in policymaking. Delegates will hear how corporations promoted and embedded policymaking reforms which increase reliance on and provide a conduit for industry-favourable science.Suggest ways forward concerning management of conflicts of interest in the publication of health research. Here we will discuss the roles that journals can play in governing conflicts of interest and issues of transparency in the publication of academic research.Suggest ways forward for funding research on unhealthy commodities. We present criteria for tobacco industry-supported research funding programs, and discuss the applicability of similar programs for funding research on other unhealthy commodities, and on the practices of other industries such as the fossil fuels industry. Key messages Corporations have been seen to skew evidence bases, manipulate interpretations of science, and influence use of science in policy and practice – such influence is a major threat to public health. This workshop exposes industry tactics in this area and begins to identify ways for dealing with them.

scholarly journals Users and Social Science Research: Policy, Problems and Possibilities

1997 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 69-81 ◽  
Author(s):  
B. Rappert
Keyword(s):  
Research Policy ◽  
Social Research ◽  
Public Funding ◽  
Social Science Research ◽  
Academic Research ◽  
User Involvement ◽  
Science Research ◽  
Research Process ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Policy Problems

Recent times have seen a significant reorientation in public funding for academic research across many countries. Public bodies in the UK have been at the forefront of such activities, typically justified in terms of a need to meet the challenges of international competitiveness and improve quality of life. One set of mechanisms advanced for further achieving these goals is the incorporation of users’ needs into various aspects of the research process. This paper examines some of the consequences of greater user involvement in the UK Economic and Social Research Council by drawing on both empirical evidence and more speculative argumentation. In doing so it poses some of the dilemmas for conceptualizing proper user involvement.

scholarly journals Survey study of research integrity officers' perceptions of research practices associated with instances of research misconduct

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Kalichman
Keyword(s):  
American Association ◽  
Causal Effect ◽  
Research Misconduct ◽  
Research Integrity ◽  
Survey Study ◽  
Good Practices ◽  
Research On Research ◽  
Definitive Answer ◽  
Research Environments ◽  
Good Research

Abstract Background: Research on research integrity has tended to focus on frequency of research misconduct and factors that might induce someone to commit research misconduct. A definitive answer to the first question has been elusive, but it remains clear that any research misconduct is too much. Answers to the second question are so diverse, it might be productive to ask a different question: What about how research is done allows research misconduct to occur?Methods: With that question in mind, research integrity officers (RIOs) of the 62 members of the American Association of Universities were invited to complete a brief survey about their most recent instance of a finding of research misconduct. Respondents were asked whether one or more good practices of research (e.g., openness and transparency, keeping good research records) were present in their case of research misconduct.Results: Twenty-four (24) of the respondents (39% response rate) indicated they had dealt with at least one finding of research misconduct and answered the survey questions. Over half of these RIOs reported that their case of research misconduct had occurred in an environment in which at least nine of the ten listed good practices of research were deficient.Conclusions: These results are not evidence for a causal effect of poor practices, but it is arguable that committing research misconduct would be more difficult if not impossible in research environments adhering to good practices of research.

scholarly journals Path2Integrity Learning Cards: First Year Experiences of an Educational Programme to Foster Research Integrity

Edukacja ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 2020 (1) ◽  
pp. 54-66
Author(s):  
Julia Priess-Buchheit ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Research Integrity ◽  
Role Playing ◽  
Educational Programme ◽  
First Year ◽  
Research Practices ◽  
Citizen Education ◽  
Research Results ◽  
Research Education ◽  
Dialogical Approach ◽  
Responsible Research

This article outlines the experience gained in the first twelve (12) months of the Path2Integrity (P2I) learning programme, an initiative designed to promote reliable research results and responsible research practices with all students, not only those destined to be researchers. Path2Integrity learning cards are student-centred instructions with a dialogical approach, using role-playing and storytelling aimed at fostering a culture of research integrity. This report shows that feedback gathered in this first year of the P2I programme supported the following three actions. First, the feedback informed distinctions between the different contexts of research education and citizen education. Second, a handbook was prepared to accompany the learning cards. And finally, students will be asked in the future to reflect on the competencies each learning card features. A review of the feedback and actions will be followed by an overview of the implications for the programme itself and for research integrity education in general.

scholarly journals Digital Badge in the Responsible Conduct of Research

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aoife Coffey ◽  
◽  
Louise Burgoyne ◽  
Brendan Palmer
Keyword(s):  
Data Management ◽  
Research Integrity ◽  
Responsible Conduct Of Research ◽  
Central Research ◽  
Graduate Studies ◽  
Research Environment ◽  
Learning Platform ◽  
Responsible Conduct ◽  
Open Research ◽  
Responsible Research

University College Cork is committed to the highest standard of Research Integrity (RI). The recently published National Framework on the Transition to an Open Research Environment aims to move Ireland another step closer to an open research environment (National Open Research Forum, 2019). One of the central elements underpinning the framework is Research Integrity and Responsible Research practice. This is also reflective of the international emphasis on not only a more open research environment but on more transparent and robust research practices generally, with a particular focus on data management and availability (​ Wilkinson et al., 2016).​ In 2016 a Research Integrity Pilot was run in the UCC Skills Centre in collaboration with the Office of the Vice President for Research and Innovation (OVPRI) and interested academics from the UCC community. Working closely with the Dean of Graduate studies, this pilot resulted in the development of the module PG6015 An​ Introduction to Research Integrity, Ethics and Open Science for postgraduate students. The new module did not address the needs of staff however, who needed an offering that was more condensed, targeted yet flexible when required. Along this developmental journey, UCC consulted with some leading experts in the field of Research Integrity (RI) by hosting, Prof. Philip DeShong and Prof. Robert Dooling from the University of Maryland via a Fulbright Specialist Award. This award facilitated real insight and a fuller understanding of what RI means together with the need for discipline specific discussion and debate around the topic of Responsible Conduct in Research in its fullest sense. In 2018, access to the Epigeum online course in Research Integrity was enabled through the National Research Integrity Forum. This course provides a good basis for learning in the area of RI but it does not address a need for a blended learning approach around the topics of Responsible Conduct of Research. Through this process began the genesis of an idea which in 2019 resulted in the development of the UCC Digital Badge in the Responsible Conduct of Research. Micro-credentials are a new and innovative learning platform that rewards learner effort outside of traditional pathways, digital badges are an example of these. The Digital Badge in the Responsible Conduct of Research is a research led, team based initiative developed through a unique interdisciplinary collaboration between central research services at UCC. The collaborative process has resulted in an offering that gives an integrated and comprehensive view of three distinct but related areas, Research Integrity, Research Data Management & the Fair Principles and Reproducible Research. Developed by OVPRI, UCC Library and the Clinical Research Facility-Cork (CRF-C), each of the collaborators were already providing training and resources in there own niche but realised a more holistic approach would be greater than the sum of its parts. The purpose of the Digital Badge is to foster and embed best practice and the key elements of Responsible Research in the UCC research community. It offers researchers an opportunity to address significant gaps in their skills and prepares them for the changes in the research landscape occurring both nationally and internationally.

The Association for Educational Assessment - Europe. An Agency for Accountability in Europe

CADMO ◽  
2009 ◽  
pp. 5-18
Author(s):  
Emma Nardi
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
European Union ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Research Policy ◽  
Educational Assessment ◽  
Research Area ◽  
Research Development ◽  
The European Union ◽  
European Institutions ◽  
European Higher Education

- AEA-Europe was founded in 2000 with the main goals of improving communication among European institutions interested in educational and occupational assessment, and providing a framework within which co-operative research, development implementation and evaluation of projects involving educational assessment could be undertaken. After 10 years of successful activity, the Association has built a position that could allow it to become the protagonist of the EU's policy in the field of assessment, becoming a reference point for all its members, and playing a crucial role as an applicant for projects funded by the European Union. This article, dealing with research policy, describes the activity carried out by the Association since 2000, presents the EU's policy in research funding specifically applied to Tempus projects, and discusses how the Association could contribute to evaluation and accountability in the European Higher Education and Research Area.

Investor relations – a systematic literature review

2018 ◽  
Vol 23 (3) ◽  
pp. 294-311 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christian Pieter Hoffmann ◽  
Sandra Tietz ◽  
Kerstin Hammann
Keyword(s):  
Literature Review ◽  
Systematic Literature Review ◽  
Research Process ◽  
The State ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Investor Relations ◽  
Corporate Communications ◽  
Comprehensive Overview ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Organization Strategy

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to present a comprehensive, interdisciplinary review of international investor relations (IR) research published since 1990. It highlights the development of IR research, its disciplinary foundations and key areas of inquiry. Research is shown to reflect the rising importance of IR as a corporate communications function, its interdisciplinary character, and the recognition of its contribution to strategic management.Design/methodology/approachFindings are based on an interdisciplinary systematic literature review focusing on peer-reviewed journal articles published in English since 1990.FindingsThe authors differentiate five strands of research focusing on the organization, strategy, instruments, content and effects of IR. IR research is shown to have strong roots in the business and management, accounting and communications literature. The authors document a rising interest in the topic and a steady development beyond descriptive accounts of the function to distinctive lines of inquiry. The authors summarize the state of the field and derive a number of suggestions for future research.Research limitations/implicationsThe review is limited in scope to the applied research process, including the choice of keywords, databases as well as peer-reviewed journal publications published in English since 1990.Originality/valueThis study contributes to the necessary structuration and consolidation of the emergent field of IR research by identify salient perspectives and common subfields. It provides both a comprehensive overview of the state of research and specific suggestions for future endeavors.

scholarly journals Different Routes, Similar Destination: Building Breast Care Models in Tanzania, Zambia, and Colombia

2018 ◽  
Vol 4 (Supplement 3) ◽  
pp. 7s-7s
Author(s):  
Anna Cabanes ◽  
Mary Rose Giattas ◽  
Mavalynne Orozco-Urdaneta ◽  
Groesbeck Parham ◽  
Leeya Pinder ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Cervical Cancer ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Conflicts Of Interest ◽  
Cancer Education ◽  
Noncommunicable Diseases ◽  
Breast Health ◽  
Implementation Framework ◽  
Country Ownership ◽  
Care Assessment

Purpose Cancer is becoming an urgent problem in low- and middle-income countries as the global burden of disease shifts from infectious to noncommunicable diseases. Whereas cervical cancer and breast cancer are preventable and treatable, these diseases are the leading causes of women’s cancer deaths in low-resource settings, mostly because of late-stage presentation and limited diagnostic and treatment capacities. Methods Using the Breast Health Global Initiative resource-stratified guidelines and a phased implementation approach, countries with resource constraints have designed and implemented breast cancer interventions that allow for a balanced, efficient, and equitable use of limited resources. Results Tanzania, Zambia, and a rural area of Colombia serve as examples of evidence-based approaches to the implementation of breast cancer control programs, leveraging the successes and experiences of existing care platforms—mostly cervical cancer and HIV—while creating a solid foundation for country ownership and sustainability. Tanzania used a top-down approach, investing in understanding the needs through a breast health care assessment to inform policy and practice, as well as building a national policy framework. Zambia analyzed the successes and experiences of their public Cervical Cancer Prevention Program to introduce breast cancer education, detection, and surgical treatment, and to improve the time of diagnosis for breast cancer using the single-visit approach recommended by WHO for cervical cancer. A rural community in Colombia has focused on mitigating some of the most common barriers that women face during their cancer journey by improving the cancer education of medical personnel, providing technology for early diagnosis, and implementing an outreach and navigation program that has significantly reduced waiting times from screening through diagnosis and treatment. Conclusion What are key characteristics that guarantee success? Country ownership is crucial, with political, institutional, and community ownership; capabilities; and accountability. Under these four dimensions and a phased implementation framework, we explain the approach that civil society, ministries of health, and stakeholders have taken to implement these programs. AUTHORS' DISCLOSURES OF POTENTIAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST The following represents disclosure information provided by authors of this manuscript. All relationships are considered compensated. Relationships are self-held unless noted. I = Immediate Family Member, Inst = My Institution. Relationships may not relate to the subject matter of this manuscript. For more information about ASCO's conflict of interest policy, please refer to www.asco.org/rwc or ascopubs.org/jco/site/ifc . Anna Cabanes Research Funding: Pfizer, Genentech, Merk (Inst) Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Pfizer, Astra Zeneca Mary Rose Giattas Research Funding: Pfizer, Genentech, Merk (Inst) Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Pfizer, Astra Zeneca Mavalynne Orozco Urdaneta Stock or Other Ownership: Celgene, Johnson and Johnson Armando Sardi Stock or Other Ownership: Celgene, Johnson and Johnson

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document