scholarly journals Ethical Shades of Gray: Questionable Research Practices in Health Professions Education

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anthony R. Artino ◽  
Erik W. Driessen ◽  
Lauren A. Maggio

AbstractPurposeTo maintain scientific integrity and engender public confidence, research must be conducted responsibly. Whereas scientific misconduct, like data fabrication, is clearly irresponsible and unethical, other behaviors—often referred to as questionable research practices (QRPs)—exploit the ethical shades of gray that color acceptable practice. This study aimed to measure the frequency of self-reported QRPs in a diverse, international sample of health professions education (HPE) researchers.MethodIn 2017, the authors conducted an anonymous, cross-sectional survey study. The web-based survey contained 43 QRP items that asked respondents to rate how often they had engaged in various forms of scientific misconduct. The items were adapted from two previously published surveys.ResultsIn total, 590 HPE researchers took the survey. The mean age was 46 years (SD=11.6), and the majority of participants were from the United States (26.4%), Europe (23.2%), and Canada (15.3%). The three most frequently reported QRPs were adding authors to a paper who did not qualify for authorship (60.6%), citing articles that were not read (49.5%), and selectively citing papers to please editors or reviewers (49.4%). Additionally, respondents reported misrepresenting a participant’s words (6.7%), plagiarizing (5.5%), inappropriately modifying results (5.3%), deleting data without disclosure (3.4%), and fabricating data (2.4%). Overall, 533 (90.3%) respondents reported at least one QRP.ConclusionsNotwithstanding the methodological limitations of survey research, these findings indicate that a substantial proportion of HPE researchers report a range of QRPs. In light of these results, reforms are needed to improve the credibility and integrity of the HPE research enterprise.“Researchers should practice research responsibly. Unfortunately, some do not.” –Nicholas H. Steneck, 20061

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lauren A. Maggio ◽  
Ting Dong ◽  
Erik W. Driessen ◽  
Anthony R. Artino

AbstractIntroductionEngaging in scientific misconduct and questionable research practices (QRPs) is a noted problem across fields, including health professions education (HPE). To mitigate these practices, other disciplines have enacted strategies based on researcher characteristics and practice factors. Thus, to inform HPE, this article seeks to determine which researcher characteristics and practice factors, if any, might explain the frequency of irresponsible research practices.MethodIn 2017, a cross-sectional survey of HPE researchers was conducted. The survey included 66 items derived from two published QRP surveys and a publication pressure scale adapted from the literature. The study outcome was the self-reported misconduct frequency score, which is a weighted mean score for each respondent on all misconduct and QRP items. Statistical analysis included descriptive statistics, correlation analysis, and multiple linear regression analysis.Results and DiscussionIn total, 590 researchers took the survey. Results from the regression analysis indicated that researcher age had a negative association with the misconduct frequency score (b = −.01, t = −2.91, p<.05) suggesting that older researchers tended to have lower misconduct frequency scores. Publication pressure (b = .20, t = 7.82, p<.001) and number of publications (b = .001, t = 3.27, p<.01) had positive associations with the misconduct frequency score. The greater the publication pressure or the more publications a researcher reported, the higher the misconduct frequency score. Overall, the explanatory variables accounted for 21% of the variance in the misconduct frequency score, and publication pressure was the strongest predictor. These findings provide an evidence base from which HPE might tailor strategies to address scientific misconduct and QRPs.


SATS ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
Author(s):  
Hanne Andersen

Abstract This paper presents current work in philosophy of science in practice that focusses on practices that are detrimental to the production of scientific knowledge. The paper argues that philosophy of scientific malpractice both provides an epistemological complement to research ethics in understanding scientific misconduct and questionable research practices, and provides a new approach to how training in responsible conduct of research can be implemented.


Author(s):  
Wendy M. Green

The number of health professions education programs continues to increase across the United States and globally, but unequal access to healthcare remains a pressing issue. Health professions education has shifted from a first-generation approach, centered on didactic teaching, to a second-generation approach, centered on problem-based learning. In a Lancet paper, Frenk and colleagues argued for the incorporation of a transformative paradigm within health professions education facilitating the move towards the third generation of health professions education. Drawing on Mezirow and Freire, they argued for the incorporation of a transformative paradigm to improve health professions education by better aligning medical education and population needs. This chapter examines how a transformative approach to health professions education could be implemented and where it would be most effective. It also looks at how a transformative paradigm within health professions education could provide an additional lens to understand health disparities, structural inequity, and diversity.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mehreen Sheikh

This paper examines whether we can have confidence in the scientific integrity of a research effort that could potentially be part of the illicit trade in cultural artefacts. As an example, I use the research on the ancient clay tablets from the Schøyen Collection. A closer study of the research product reveals questionable research practices, and the latter issue is then put into a wider context. After highlighting the importance of the research community as a social institution in shaping the norms and values of its members, and its influence on what is desirable research, I explore how these expectations and guidelines impact research conducted on illicit cultural artefacts.


2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Giulianne Krug

The number of disabled students enrolling in college is steadily increasing in the United States (U.S.). At the same time, there is a trend in this country of efforts to increase diversity and inclusion in postsecondary institutions. As an underrepresented minority in these efforts, disabled students, many of whom aspire to careers in the health professions, have not persisted in college to the degree of their non-disabled counterparts. There is a paucity of research seeking to understand the experiences and perceptions of disabled college students, with particularly limited efforts notable in the U.S. as compared to other countries worldwide. Studies specific to disabled health professions students as a cohort are nonexistent to date. Central University (CU) is a large, research very-high institution in the Midwest with several health professions programs within the College of Health Professions (CHP). Approximately 7% of students enrolled in the CHP are registered with the Office of Disability Services (ODS), consistent with the proportion of disabled students across campus. The director of the ODS at CU identified accessibility and inclusion as a specific concern in health professions education, both at CU and nationally. This research is a direct response to that concern. In effort to hear the collective voices of disabled students in the CU CHP, a qualitative case study was conducted using a series of 3 extensive semi-structured interviews. Additionally, participants were encouraged to take photographs representative of their experiences of access and inclusion within the school. Nine participants completed all three interviews and one participant completed one. Consistent with enrollment in the CHP overall, 7 (70%) participants were enrolled in the non-professional health sciences program and 3 (30%) were enrolled in professional programs within the school. Consistent with students registered with the ODS at CU, 9 students had invisible disabilities (90%) and 1 had a visible disability (10%). The social model of disability, which identifies societal structure as the problem which serves to disable individuals as opposed to the impairment, was used as a lens through which the data was analyzed and interpreted. While all participants were able to identify specific faculty, staff members, and peers who treated them with respect and inclusion, a significant number of experiences represented in the interview and photographic data were either suggestive of or overtly revealed experiences and perceptions of marginalization and exclusion. Several students reflected upon the experience of entering the ODS building and feeling instantly set apart; once registered, informing instructors of their accommodation status further served to separate participants from their peers and often resulted in a negative response from the faculty member. Student experiences of inclusion and acceptance often varied dependent upon others' ability to see and understand the disability; invisibility or misapprehending of disability often resulted in outright denial of reasonable accommodations. Further, consequences of disability disclosure resulted in both subtle and overt discouragement from pursuing admission to CHP programs on several occasions. Overall, disabled students in the CHP voiced concerns with faculty, staff, and peer attitudes and behaviors that served to marginalize them and prevent full and equal engagement in their education as their non-disabled peers. The implications of this research are significant and far-reaching. Disability service offices on the CU campus and beyond operate on the medical model of disability; the results of this study suggest the social model of disability as an appropriate lens through which to examine the disability policies on which campus disability offices establish criteria and procedures for supporting disabled students. Further, and perhaps more importantly, replication of this research across disciplines and institutions would serve to inform and perhaps perpetuate policy change in this country. Exploration of faculty, staff, and clinical preceptor understanding about disability policy, educational rights of disabled students, and inclusive educational practices would serve to identify specific areas of education needed to enhance the educational experiences of disabled college students. Specific to the health professions, exploration of admissions processes to identify potentially discriminative admission practices and inform new, more inclusive practices would be an important step to creating equal educational opportunity.


2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Rowe ◽  
Christian R. Osadnik ◽  
Shane Pritchard ◽  
Stephen Maloney

Abstract Introduction Open Online Courses (OOCs) are increasingly presented as a possible solution to the many challenges of higher education. However, there is currently little evidence available to support decisions around the use of OOCs in health professions education. The aim of this systematic review was to summarise the available evidence describing the features of OOCs in health professions education and to analyse their utility for decision-making using a self-developed framework consisting of point scores around effectiveness, learner experiences, feasibility, pedagogy and economics. Methods Electronic searches of PubMed, Medline, Embase, PsychInfo and CINAHL were made up to April 2019 using keywords related to OOC variants and health professions. We accepted any type of full text English publication with no exclusions made on the basis of study quality. Data were extracted using a custom-developed, a priori critical analysis framework comprising themes relating to effectiveness, economics, pedagogy, acceptability and learner experience. Results 54 articles were included in the review and 46 were of the lowest levels of evidence, and most were offered by institutions based in the United States (n = 11) and United Kingdom (n = 6). Most studies provided insufficient course detail to make any confident claims about participant learning, although studies published from 2016 were more likely to include information around course aims and participant evaluation. In terms of the five categories identified for analysis, few studies provided sufficiently robust evidence to be used in formal decision making in undergraduate or postgraduate curricula. Conclusion This review highlights a poor state of evidence to support or refute claims regarding the effectiveness of OOCs in health professions education. Health professions educators interested in developing courses of this nature should adopt a critical and cautious position regarding their adoption.


2012 ◽  
Vol 23 (5) ◽  
pp. 524-532 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leslie K. John ◽  
George Loewenstein ◽  
Drazen Prelec

Cases of clear scientific misconduct have received significant media attention recently, but less flagrantly questionable research practices may be more prevalent and, ultimately, more damaging to the academic enterprise. Using an anonymous elicitation format supplemented by incentives for honest reporting, we surveyed over 2,000 psychologists about their involvement in questionable research practices. The impact of truth-telling incentives on self-admissions of questionable research practices was positive, and this impact was greater for practices that respondents judged to be less defensible. Combining three different estimation methods, we found that the percentage of respondents who have engaged in questionable practices was surprisingly high. This finding suggests that some questionable practices may constitute the prevailing research norm.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document