scholarly journals Fraud and Misconduct in Publishing Medical Research

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dya Eldin Mohammed Elsayed
Keyword(s):  
Medical Research ◽  
Human Subjects ◽  
Research Misconduct ◽  
Research Process ◽  
Research Report ◽  
Scientific Journals ◽  
Data Fabrication ◽  
Negative Findings ◽  
Report Data ◽  
Research Fraud

One of the important feature of scientific research is scrutinizing truth. Investigators strive for honesty and integrity in all scientific communications.  Candidly reported methods and procedures, data and results, and their publication status should reflect authenticity. Publication of fake data diverts the search from truth. The aim of studying human subjects should be advancing research and scholarship and not just the researcher’s own career. Misconduct in medical research is any intentional deviation from acceptable ethical principles. Intentional misconduct is a serious observation, and misconduct such as falsification and fabrication of data and plagiarism are the most common fraud practices in medical research. Misconduct can occur at any stage of the research process; however, it particularly occurs in the results section of the research as researchers try to avoid negative findings. Data falsification occurs when investigators attempt to alter data to meet their own expectations. Falsification could involve altering data and results on research participants’ record to fit research report. Data fabrication occurs when researchers report data that were completely constructed and never occurred when running the research. Plagiarism is using—either deliberate or inattentive—other researchers’ ideas and words without clearly acknowledging the source of that information. Although fraud and misconduct have serious consequences, they are not uncommon among research publications in scientific journals. Institutions have to develop a mechanism to discover research misconduct and to prevent it. Editors and reviewers are required to introduce some commentaries in the regulations to impose sanctions on those found guilty of research misconduct. Key words: research, fraud, misconduct

scholarly journals Publishing articles in scientific journals: a concern for research misconduct or dishonesty (fabrication, falsification and plagiarism)

Mediscope ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 1-4
Author(s):  
MS Laskar
Keyword(s):  
Medical Research ◽  
Academic Research ◽  
Research Misconduct ◽  
Scientific Research ◽  
Scientific Journals ◽  
Research Groups ◽  
Research Results ◽  
Area Of Concern ◽  
Ethical Responsibilities

An area of concern in scientific research including medical research is misconduct or dishonesty like fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism in proposing, performing, or reviewing research, or in reporting research results. This article focuses on the concepts of research misconduct with the objectives to discuss briefly on the extent of problem, various forms, possible reasons; methods of detection, and prevention. It is expected that this article will encourage the leaders of academic research groups to inform their students, future researchers and research associates about the ethical responsibilities of scientific research and publications, and to insure that, when they are given the responsibility for research and consequently submitting a paper, they are fully aware of the potential consequences to themselves and to their coauthors for violations of research ethical guidelines.Mediscope Vol. 4, No. 2: Jul 2017, Page 1-4

scholarly journals Conditions of Legality of Medical Human Subject Research

Medicne pravo ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 69-77
Author(s):  
M. V. Mendzhul
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Medical Research ◽  
Human Genome ◽  
Human Subject ◽  
Human Subjects ◽  
Research Process ◽  
Embryo Research ◽  
Human Subject Research ◽  
Nuremberg Code

The article examines international acts and national legislation and highlights the conditions for the legality of medical research with human participation. The provisions of the Nuremberg Code (1947), the Helsinki Declaration of the World Medical Association «Ethical principles for medical research involv- ing human subjects» (1964), the Universal Declaration on the Human Genome and Human Rights (1997), the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Dignity of the Human Being with regard to the Application of Biology and Medicine: Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine (1997) and the Addi- tional Protocols to the Convention, Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council (EU) No 536/2014. The support of the recommendation to ratify the Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine and its additional protocols in Ukraine has been expressed. It has been established that international acts stipulate that the design and implementation of each human subject research must be clearly described in the research protocol. In addition, research protocols must be subject to prior review by the Ethics Committees. It has been substantiated that international acts set for medical research standards, which are based on the principles of respect for dignity and human rights, the priority of interests of the person over the interests of society or sci- ence, compliance with safety requirements and prevention of harm to humans, mandatory permission to conduct medical examination, research and control- lability of the research process and its results, compensation for any damage caused by medical research. Conditions of legality of medical research can be divided into general (obser- vance of which is always necessary if a person participates in experiments) and special (additional conditions of legality, which are put forward depend- ing on the field or object of research, namely in the field of experiments com- bined with medical care , human genome research, in vitro embryo research, in the field of clinical trials of drugs).

Integrity in Research

2018 ◽  
pp. 397-416
Author(s):  
Sandra Carvalho ◽  
Gustavo Rivara ◽  
Andre Brunoni ◽  
Felipe Fregni
Keyword(s):  
Human Subjects ◽  
Research Misconduct ◽  
Research Integrity ◽  
Research Process ◽  
International Committee ◽  
Ethical Principles ◽  
Belmont Report ◽  
Subject Selection ◽  
Scientific Report ◽  
Ethics In Research

This chapter discusses authorship, ethics in research, plagiarism, and misconduct. It summarizes the general criteria for scientific report authorship according to the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) and Ethics in Research. It discusses ethics in research, based on the famous Tuskegee syphilis study, and the Belmont Report that followed it. Three basic ethical principles derived from the Belmont Report—respect for persons, beneficence, and justice—and their impact on research with human subjects are discussed, along with the direct applications of these three ethical principles: informed consent, risk/benefit ratio, and subject selection. Finally, the chapter reviews the main aspects of research misconduct and presents some examples. Research integrity requires that the research process is governed by honesty, objectivity, and verifiable methods, instead of preconceived ideas and expectations. It is an important topic to be reviewed and discussed before anyone decides to pursue the field of clinical research.

scholarly journals The principles of medical ethics and medical research

1999 ◽  
Vol 15 (suppl 1) ◽  
pp. S7-S13 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Harris
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Medical Ethics ◽  
Medical Research ◽  
Late Onset ◽  
Human Subjects ◽  
Predictive Testing ◽  
Public Health Issue ◽  
Public Health Medicine ◽  
International Ethics ◽  
Ongoing Research

In this paper I discuss the application of the principles of medical ethics and of medical research to the case of children and others whose consent to treatment and to research is problematic. Public health depends substantially on the possibility of ongoing research into all conditions which affect the health of the people. Constraints on this research are therefore a public health issue. Moreover and more importantly the possibility of predictive testing and indeed of screening for health-relevant conditions is an important public health tool, and limitations on the use of this tool are of great significance to public health medicine. Having considered the particular problems created by research and predictive testing on children for late-onset conditions I go on to discuss research on those whose consent is problematic more generally. I conclude with radical recommendations for the reform of The Declaration of Helsinki and of the International Ethics Guidelines for Biomedical Research Involving Human Subjects, prepared by the Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences (CIOMS).

scholarly journals Embedding consumer and community involvement within an established research centre: moving from general recommendations to an actionable framework

2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Tilini Gunatillake ◽  
Cade Shadbolt ◽  
Daniel Gould ◽  
Michelle Lam ◽  
Marion Glanville Hearst ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Medical Research ◽  
National Health ◽  
Research Program ◽  
Community Involvement ◽  
Research Council ◽  
Medical Research Council ◽  
Research Process ◽  
Research Centre ◽  
Community Members

Plain English summary Involving consumers and community members in the research process is an important step towards developing and delivering effective, person-centered health care. The National Health and Medical Research Council have provided recommendations for involving consumers and community members in research; however, definitive actions to implement these are not well defined. To address this, an established research centre in Melbourne, Australia, has developed a consumer and community involvement framework to incorporate the national recommendations into their research program. This paper describes the framework the research centre has employed, in the hope that other researchers can adapt this approach and learnings to their own research practices. The framework described in this paper aims to foster partnerships between consumers, community members and researchers, and in doing so, encourages consumers to be actively involved in research to help improve future outcomes for those living with musculoskeletal conditions. Simultaneously, the framework encourages researchers to value the consumer voice in their research to ensure they yield meaningful research outcomes for those living with musculoskeletal conditions. Abstract Background The value of involving consumers and community members in every stage of the research process is gaining recognition as an important consideration in the wider research landscape. The National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) has provided general recommendations for involving consumers and community members in research, although the translation of these recommendations into tangible actions has not yet been well defined. In light of these recommendations, many research institutions are now seeking to incorporate the voices of consumers and community members in their research practices. Methods The consumer and community involvement framework described in this paper incorporates the NHMRC’s recommendations to produce a four-tiered model where consumer participants nominate their level of involvement depending on their research interests and preferred level of commitment. In ascending order, the tiers are: Consumer Subscriber, Document Reviewer, Research Buddy and Consumer Advocate. The success of this framework depends upon the implementation of effective governance and access to appropriate infrastructure. A Consumer and Community Advisory Group and a designated Consumer and Community Liaison Officer will take responsibility for ensuring appropriate interactions between consumers, researchers, and the research center’s executive team. The framework aims to apply suitable support structures in place to manage expectations and minimize barriers to effective involvement, whilst ensuring that consumer contributions are appropriately valued and incorporated in the research. Discussion Involving consumers and community members in the research process is an important step towards developing and delivering effective, person-centered health care. While consumer and community involvement offer researchers invaluable perspectives on their research program, it provides an opportunity for consumers and community members to be actively involved in health research and improve the health and wellbeing for those living with health conditions.

scholarly journals Research Misconduct Policies of Scientific Journals

2009 ◽  
Vol 16 (5) ◽  
pp. 254-267 ◽  
Author(s):  
DAVID B. RESNIK ◽  
SHYAMAL PEDDADA ◽  
WINNON BRUNSON
Keyword(s):  
Research Misconduct ◽  
Scientific Journals

Presenting Medical Statistics from Proposal to Publication

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Janet L. Peacock ◽  
Sally M. Kerry ◽  
Raymond R. Balise
Keyword(s):  
Journal Article ◽  
Real Data ◽  
Research Process ◽  
Research Report ◽  
Medical Statistics ◽  
Extensive Experience ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Sample Size Calculations ◽  
The Usa ◽  
The Uk

Presenting Medical Statistics from Proposal to Publication (second edition) aims to show readers how to conduct a wide range of statistical analyses from sample size calculations through to multifactorial regressions that are needed in the research process. The second edition of ‘Presenting’ has been revised and updated and now includes Stata, SAS, SPSS, and R. The book shows how to interpret each computer output and illustrates how to present the results and accompanying text in a format suitable for a peer-reviewed journal article or research report. All analyses are illustrated using real data and all programming code, outputs, and datasets used in the book are available on a website for readers to freely download and use. ‘Presenting’ includes practical information and helpful tips for software, all statistical methods used, and the research process. It is written by three experienced biostatisticians, Janet Peacock, Sally Kerry, and Ray Balise from the UK and the USA, and is born out of their extensive experience conducting collaborative medical research, teaching medical students, physicians, and other health professionals, and providing researchers with advice.

Risk, double effect and the social benefit requirement

2020 ◽  
pp. medethics-2019-106034
Author(s):  
Robert C Hughes
Keyword(s):  
Medical Research ◽  
Human Subjects ◽  
Double Effect ◽  
Social Benefit ◽  
Social Value ◽  
Doctrine Of Double Effect ◽  
Medical Benefit ◽  
The Social ◽  
Physical Risk ◽  
Research On Human Subjects

Many ethicists maintain that medical research on human subjects that presents no prospect of direct medical benefit must have a prospect of social benefit to be ethical. Payment is not the sort of benefit that justifies exposing subjects to risk. Alan Wertheimer has raised a serious challenge to this view, pointing out that in industry, social value is not considered necessary to make dangerous jobs ethical. This article argues that Wertheimer was correct to think that the ethics of hazard pay should be the same in medical research and in business. Nevertheless, a qualified social benefit requirement should apply in both fields. For a study or a job with significant net physical risk to be ethical, it must have social value beyond the satisfaction of ordinary preferences, including the preference for money. The requirement derives from a non-absolutist version of the doctrine of double effect. If a risky study or a dangerous job has no distinctive social value, and hazard pay is subjects' or workers’ only reason to undergo risks, the very fact that they undergo risk is intended as a means to a financial end. Inviting people to enrol in such a study or to take such a job wrongfully treats people as mere means. By contrast, if a study or a job has social value, people can participate with a primary end other than money, even if they accept compensation. Researchers or employers do not intend but merely foresee risks to subjects or workers.

scholarly journals Ethics in Health Research

Encuentro ◽  
2010 ◽  
pp. 55-66 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Wikler
Keyword(s):  
Medical Research ◽  
Health Research ◽  
Ethical Issues ◽  
Human Subjects ◽  
Ethical Problems

That medical research with human subjects presents ethical issues and problems is well known. I will talk about some of these in what follows. But it is worth emphasizing beforehand that if there is one overwhelming problem involving research that is of great of ethical importance, it is that there is not enough research. So the purpose of this presentation is not to point to ethical problems in research in order to discourage research. It is exactly the opposite: it is because of the importance of research that we want to make sure that our purpose is not blocked by ethical problems which we could have avoided if we thought about these things well before hand. 

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document