unethical research
Recently Published Documents


TOTAL DOCUMENTS

49
(FIVE YEARS 14)

H-INDEX

8
(FIVE YEARS 1)

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rens van de Schoot ◽  
Sonja D. Winter ◽  
Elian Griffioen ◽  
Stephan Grimmelikhuijsen ◽  
Ingrid Arts ◽  
...  

The popularity and use of Bayesian methods have increased across many research domains. The current article demonstrates how some less familiar Bayesian methods can be used. Specifically, we applied expert elicitation, testing for prior-data conflicts, the Bayesian Truth Serum, and testing for replication effects via Bayes Factors in a series of four studies investigating the use of questionable research practices (QRPs). Scientifically fraudulent or unethical research practices have caused quite a stir in academia and beyond. Improving science starts with educating Ph.D. candidates: the scholars of tomorrow. In four studies concerning 765 Ph.D. candidates, we investigate whether Ph.D. candidates can differentiate between ethical and unethical or even fraudulent research practices. We probed the Ph.D.s’ willingness to publish research from such practices and tested whether this is influenced by (un)ethical behavior pressure from supervisors or peers. Furthermore, 36 academic leaders (deans, vice-deans, and heads of research) were interviewed and asked to predict what Ph.D.s would answer for different vignettes. Our study shows, and replicates, that some Ph.D. candidates are willing to publish results deriving from even blatant fraudulent behavior–data fabrication. Additionally, some academic leaders underestimated this behavior, which is alarming. Academic leaders have to keep in mind that Ph.D. candidates can be under more pressure than they realize and might be susceptible to using QRPs. As an inspiring example and to encourage others to make their Bayesian work reproducible, we published data, annotated scripts, and detailed output on the Open Science Framework (OSF).


2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (13) ◽  
pp. 1796-1796
Author(s):  
Hannah R. Vasanthi ◽  
Subhendu Mukherjee ◽  
Dipak K. Das

The article “Potential health benefits of broccoli- a chemico-biological overview, published in Mini-Rev Med Chem 2009 Jun;9(6):749-59. By Hannah R. Vasanthi, Subhendu Mukherjee and Dipak K. Das” has been retracted by the Editorial office of the journal Mini-reviews in Medicinal Chemistry, as the text in this review article are from sources which have been retracted or under investigation on the basis of data fabrication and falsification, authorship misconduct, duplicate publication, unethical research practices, text recycling/self-plagiarism, and unresolved concerns about data integrity and research conduct. The authors were informed of this complaint and were requested to give justification on the matter in their defense [1]. Some sources that have been retracted are as follows: 1) Agarwal et al. Dynamic Action of Carotenoids in Cardioprotection and Maintenance of Cardiac Health, Molecules 2012, 17, 4755-4769. http: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24896014/ 2) Nagendran Balasundram, KalyanaSundram, SamirSamman. Phenolic compounds in plants and agri-industrial byproducts: Antioxidant activity, occurrence, and potential uses. Food Chemistry 2006, 99(1), 191-203. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0308814605006242 Bentham Science apologizes to the readers of the journal for any inconvenience this may have caused. The Bentham Editorial Policy on Article Retraction can be found at https://benthamscience.com/editorial-policies-main.php. REFERENCES [1] Hannah R Vasanthi, Subhendu Mukherjee, Dipak K Das. Potential health benefits of broccoli- a chemico-biological overview. Mini Rev Med Chem., 2009, 9(6), 749-759. doi: 10.2174/138955709788452685. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19519500/ Bentham Science Disclaimer: It is a condition of publication that manuscripts submitted to this journal have not been published and will not be simultaneously submitted or published elsewhere. Furthermore, any data, illustration, structure or table that has been published elsewhere must be reported, and copyright permission for reproduction must be obtained. Plagiarism is strictly forbidden, and by submitting the article for publication the authors agree that the publishers have the legal right to take appropriate action against the authors, if plagiarism or fabricated information is discovered. By submitting a manuscript, the authors agree that the copyright of their article is transferred to the publishers if and when the article is accepted for publication.


2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 3-9
Author(s):  
Mohan Raj Sharma ◽  
Namita Ghimire

The scientific validity of any project relies heavily on the ethically conducted and published research work. Conducting good quality research and publishing it in a scholarly, peer-reviewed journal is the ultimate dream of any researcher. However if not done without any research and publication ethics, the work will be counterproductive. Fortunately, there are several publications on ethics of research and publication guiding an early-stage researcher to follow the underlying principles. Research ethics include upholding the basic ethical principles of human research, namely, respect for persons, beneficence, and justice. Publication ethics involve not committing scientific misconduct, resolving authorship disputes, and avoiding simultaneous submission and duplicate publication. Repercussions of unethical research and publications are often unforgiving. Researchers in developing countries face unique challenges in this regard. However, at no cost should these principles be ignored. This will promote the development of a healthy research and publication culture, so desperately needed in these populations. Researchers, sponsors, ethical boards, publishers, and editors should work hand-in-hand to safeguard the research and publication integrity. In this review, issues surrounding research and publication ethics relevant to developing countries will be discussed.


2021 ◽  
Vol 27 (19) ◽  
pp. 2325-2325
Author(s):  
Jun Iwamoto ◽  
Tsuyoshi Takeda ◽  
Yoshihiro Sato

The article entitled “Effects of Vitamin K2 on Osteoporosis, published in Curr Pharm Des 2004; 10(21): 2557-76, by Iwamoto J, Takeda T and Sato Y.” has been retracted by the Editorial office of the journal Current Pharmaceutical Design, as the text, data and some figures used/referred in this review article are from sources which have been retracted or under investigation on the basis of data fabrication and falsification, authorship misconduct, duplicate publication, unethical research practices, text recycling/self-plagiarism, and unresolved concerns about data integrity and research conduct. The authors were informed of this complaint and were requested to give justification on the matter in their defense. However, no reply was received from their side in this regard. Some sources that have been retracted are as follows: 1. Iwamoto J, Takeda T, Ichimura S. Combined treatment with vitamin K2 and bisphosphonate in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. Yonsei Med J 2003; 44: 751-6. Available at: https://eymj.org/DOIx.php?id=10.3349/ymj.2019.60.1.115. 2. Sato Y, Honda Y, Kuno H, Oizumi K. Menatetrenone ameliorates osteopenia in disuse-affected limbs of vitamin D- and K-deficient stroke patients. Bone 1998; 23: 291-6. Available at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S8756328298001082. 3. Sato Y, Honda Y, Kaji M, Asoh T, Hosokawa K, Kondo I, et al. Amelioration of osteoporosis by menatetrenone in elderly female Parkinson's disease patients with vitamin D deficiency. Bone 2002; 31: 114-8. Available at: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/ 12110423/. Bentham Science apologizes to its readers for any inconvenience this may have caused. The Bentham Editorial Policy on Article Retraction can be found at https://benthamscience.com/editorial-policies-main.php. Bentham Science Disclaimer: It is a condition of publication that manuscripts submitted to this journal have not been published and will not be simultaneously submitted or published elsewhere. Furthermore, any data, illustration, structure or table that has been published elsewhere must be reported, and copyright permission for reproduction must be obtained. Plagiarism is strictly forbidden, and by submitting the article for publication the authors agree that the publishers have the legal right to take appropriate action against the authors, if plagiarism or fabricated information is discovered. By submitting a manuscript, the authors agree that the copyright of their article is transferred to the publishers if and when the article is accepted for publication.


Author(s):  
Роман Рифатович Белялетдинов

С учетом позиций визуальной семиотики предложен концепт «отложенные риски». Концепт фиксирует основание, во-первых, для анализа ситуации, вызванной развитием новых форм биомедицинских исследований, прежде всего генетических, на платформе биобанков. Во-вторых, для поиска формы предупреждения участника эксперимента о рисках, в которых отсутствует очевидность непосредственной опасности для здоровья, но которые в отдаленном будущем потенциально могут входить в противоречия с личными представлениями участника о благе. Проблемную ситуацию образует специфика исследований в биобанках, технически не позволяющих запрашивать информированное согласие для каждого конкретного исследования. В статье представлен обзор возникающих способов решения проблемы. Эти способы связаны с новыми формами согласия на участие в биомедицинских исследованиях – расширенные формы, которые даются на проведение множественных исследований, без информирования донора биобанка о каждом конкретном биомедицинском исследовании, для которого используются его биообразцы. Однако релевантность таких форм согласий вызывает дискуссии, стимулируемые упоминаемыми в статье прецедентами, а также гипотетическими обстоятельствами. В статье приводятся аргументы в пользу переосмысления фактического риска для здоровья, связанного с формой обычного информированного согласия, как отложенного риска, соотносимого с социогуманитарными ценностными интенциями, ассоциирующимися с представлением о взаимосвязи автономии и блага. Переход от конкретного риска к ценностному риску, отложенному по своему эффекту во времени, может быть репрезентирован публичными механизмами. Действия этих механизмов контролируют институции социогуманитарных экспертиз и биоэтики, ответственных за легитимацию смены прагматики информированного согласия. Но в этой «буферной зоне» между интересами технонауки, в сферу которой входят биобанки, и участниками биомедицинских экспериментов остается место позициям патернализма. Сделать эти позиции различимыми (как в социальной оптике, так и в индивидуальной оптике) позволяют потенциалы визуальной семиотики. «Новая этика» служит пониманию направления разработки оптических инструментов своим установлением множественных ракурсов рассмотрения конфигурации отложенных рисков. Визуализация отложенных рисков достижима на основе семиотической диагностики ценностных интенций участников биомедицинских экспериментов, что даст возможность для доноров биобанков контролировать возникновение противоречий между их убеждением и использованием их биоматериалов, а в широкой перспективе это служит основанием доверия к институту биобанков. Необходимость в визуализации отложенных рисков определяет появление новых видов исследований с участием человека (переход от единичных биомедицинских исследований на человеке к множественным биомедицинским исследованиям на биоматериалах человека). И появление новых видов рисков: от конкретных рисков здоровью в рамках одного исследования к масштабным социогуманитарным последствиям возможных неэтичных исследований в рамках множественных исследований на основе биобанков. Taking into account standpoints of visual semiotics, the concept “delayed risks” is proposed. The concept fixes the basis (1) for analyzing the situation caused by the development of new forms of biomedical research, primarily genetic, on the platform of biobanks; and (2) for searching for a form of warning the participant of the experiment about risks with no evidence of an immediate danger to health, but in the distant future potentially conflicting with the participant’s personal ideas about the good. The problematic situation is formed by the specificity of studies in biobanks, which technically do not allow requesting informed consent for each specific study. The article provides an overview of the emerging solutions to the problem. These solutions are associated with new forms of consent for participation in biomedical research – extended forms that are given for multiple studies, without informing the biobank donor about each specific biomedical research for which his/her bio-samples are used. However, the relevance of such forms of consent is controversial, stimulated by the precedents mentioned in the article, as well as hypothetical circumstances. The article provides arguments in favor of rethinking the actual health risk connected with the form of conventional informed consent as a delayed risk correlated with sociohumanitarian value intentions that are associated with the idea of the relationship between autonomy and welfare. The transition from a specific risk to a value risk delayed in time by its effect can be represented by public mechanisms. The actions of these mechanisms are controlled by the institutions of sociohumanitarian expert examinations and bioethics, which are responsible for legitimizing the change in the pragmatics of informed consent. But in this “buffer zone” between the interests of technoscience, which includes biobanks, and participants in biomedical experiments, there remains a place for the positions of paternalism. The potentials of visual semiotics make it possible to distinguish these positions (both in social optics and in individual optics). The “new ethic” serves to understand the direction of optical instrument development by establishing multiple angles for considering the configuration of delayed risks. Visualization of delayed risks is achievable on the basis of semiotic diagnostics of the value intentions of participants in biomedical experiments, which will make it possible for biobank donors to control the occurrence of contradictions between their beliefs and the use of their biomaterials, and, in a broad perspective, this serves as the basis for trust in the institution of biobanks. The need for visualization of delayed risks determines the emergence of new types of research with human participation (the transition from single biomedical studies in humans to multiple biomedical studies on human biomaterials), as well as the emergence of new types of risks: from specific health risks in a single study to the large-scale socio-humanitarian consequences of possible unethical research in the framework of multiple studies based on biobanks.


2021 ◽  
pp. 009862832110159
Author(s):  
Maya C. Rose ◽  
Jessica E. Brodsky ◽  
Elizabeth S. Che ◽  
Patricia J. Brooks

Background: Introductory Psychology students rarely learn about unethical biomedical research outside the Tuskegee syphilis study, but these practices were widespread in U.S. public health research (e.g., at the Willowbrook State School researchers infected children with disabilities with hepatitis). Objectives: Replicate and extend Grose-Fifer’s research ethics activity by evaluating if an online homework and in-class role-play increased awareness of unethical research and abuses at Tuskegee (replication) and Willowbrook (extension) and subsequent changes in human subjects protections. Method: As homework, students read about the studies and wrote statements from perspectives of individuals involved. In class, students read their statements and discussed how outrage led to research conduct regulations. Online pre/posttests asked students why it was important to learn about both studies. Results: At posttest, students were more aware of unethical research at Willowbrook and that Tuskegee led to changes in human subjects protections. Students who completed the role-play activity were less likely to mention abuses for Tuskegee than students who did not participate. Conclusion: We were partially successful in replicating and extending Grose-Fifer. Teaching Implications: Research ethics instruction should draw attention to historical precedents and how public outrage and social activism led to increased protections for research participants.


Author(s):  
Alan Katz ◽  
Kathi Avery Kinew ◽  
Leona Star

IntroductionIndigenous populations are known to have poor health and health outcomes in many countries. Indigenous peoples continue to be the subjects of unethical research. Research that is undertaken without their consent, involvement in the design, delivery and interpretation of results that perpetuates negative stereotypes ignoring the historical and ongoing impacts of colonialism. Objectives and ApproachIn order to understand the health status and health system use of First Nations people in Manitoba Canada we developed a partnership between the First Nations Social Secretariat of Manitoba and researchers to link First Nations identifiers with administrative data. This partnership was based on long-standing relationships with researchers who were affiliated with the Manitoba Centre for Health Policy. ResultsA tripartite data sharing agreement set out the parameters of sharing data that supported the linkage of the Federal Registered First Nations database to the Manitoba Population Research Data Repository. The DSA facilitated direct First Nations input into the indicators chosen, the reporting cohorts, the interpretation of results and the language of the report. Conclusion / ImplicationsDSAs can be used as a tool to facilitate partnerships with Non-indigenous researchers and Indigenous Nations that lead to meaningful partnerships and lay the foundation for respectful and ethical research. The research presents findings the health of First Nations and shines a light on the underlying colonialism and racism that contributes to the health inequities. These findings have the potential to influence health and well-being of First Nation peoples in Manitoba. This model of collaboration can be used a model in other jurisdictions.


2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 562-570
Author(s):  
Yulong Li ◽  
Lixun Wang

The last two decades have witnessed a prolific increase in academic activity in the study of English for Academic Purposes (EAP). Many teachers who were trained for Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages (TESOL) have been required to teach EAP. TESOL and EAP are two different concepts and teachers transitioning from TESOL to teaching EAP may encounter many difficulties. However, little research has been carried out in this area, particularly beyond the context of the UK. Helping teachers to clarify their perceptions of TESOL and EAP is the first step to facilitate this transition. The present study aims to facilitate Chinese university teachers’ pedagogical transitions from TESOL to teaching EAP by clarifying teachers’ own understanding of these two concepts and by outlining how several different factors contribute to their EAP conceptualisation. By using a multiple case study methodology, the current research has revealed that the investigated teachers’ perceptions of EAP comprised eclectic theories, which overlap with some current EAP literature. Facing a somewhat unethical research culture in China, some teachers added moral rubrics into their EAP concepts as reminders to their students. The teachers reported that TESOL and EAP diverged in discourses and commissions: EAP is more student empowering, but TESOL is more humanistic.


2020 ◽  
Vol 46 (10) ◽  
pp. 691-692
Author(s):  
Wendy A Rogers ◽  
Wendy C Higgins ◽  
Angela Ballantyne ◽  
Wendy Lipworth
Keyword(s):  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document