Conflict of Interest in Science Communication: More than a Financial IssueReport from Esteve Foundation Discussion Group, April 2009

Marcovitch, Harvey; Barbour, Virginia; Borrell, Carme; Bosch, Fèlix; Fernández, Esteve; Macdonald, Helen; Marušić, Ana; Nylenna, Magne

doi:10.3325/cmj.2010.51.7

Cited by 20 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Previous findings indicated that ethical and unethical behaviors are not two polar categories because there is a graduation of severity of violations in scientific research, ranging from honest errors, over inappropriate research practices to outright fraud (Marcovitch et al 2010). Our study emphasized the position of the institutions in this grey spectrum.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 66%

How researchers perceive research misconduct in biomedicine and how they would prevent it: A qualitative study in a small scientific community

Buljan

Barać

Marušić

2018

Accountability in Research

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of our study has been to use a qualitative approach to explore the potential motivations and drivers for unethical behaviors in biomedicine and determine the role of institutions regarding those issues in a small scientific community setting. Three focus groups were held---two with doctoral students and one with active senior researchers. Purposive sampling was used to reach participants at different stages of their scientific careers. Participants in all three focus groups were asked the same questions regarding the characteristics and behaviors of ethical/unethical scientists, ethical climate, role, and responsibility of institutions; they were also asked to suggest ways to improve research integrity. The data analysis included coding of the transcripts, categorization of the initial codes, and identification of themes and patterns. Three main topics were derived from the focus groups discussions. The first included different forms of unethical behaviors including increasing research "waste," non-publication of negative results, authorship manipulation, data manipulation, and repression of collaborators. The second addressed the factors influencing unethical behavior, both external and internal, to the researchers. Two different definitions of ethics in science emerged; one from the categorical perspective and the other from the dimensional perspective. The third topic involved possible routes for improvement, one from within the institution through the research integrity education, research integrity bodies, and quality control, and the other from outside the institution through external supervision of institutions. Based on the results of our study, research misconduct in a small scientific community is perceived to be the consequence of the interaction of several social and psychological factors, both general and specific, for small research communities. Possible improvements should be systematic, aiming both for improvements in work environment and personal awareness in research ethics, and the implementation of those changes should be institutional responsibility.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 66%

How researchers perceive research misconduct in biomedicine and how they would prevent it: A qualitative study in a small scientific community

Buljan

Barać

Marušić

2018

Accountability in Research

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Marcovitch et al (2010) relatam desde plágio, publicação duplicada, mudanças não divulgadas nos protocolos pré-pesquisa ou comportamento ético duvidoso. Este espectro que vai de um "erro honesto", ou seja, sem intenção de fraude, até a fraude total, é representado por uma série de más condutas científicas.…”

Section: Questões éTicas Na Comunicação Científicaunclassified

“…Por um lado, deste espectro, temos aquelas que se aproximam do erro não-intencional e de difícil detecção, como uma observação ou análise errada, arquivamento inadequado, publicações duplas e fatiadas e ainda a ação de ignorar o trabalho anterior de outros. Enquanto do outro, temos más condutas que se aproximam da fraude, de forma intencional e de detecção mais fácil, como pesquisas sem consentimento informado, plágio, falsificação ou fabricação de dados e experiências humanas ilegais (Marcovitch et al, 2010).…”

Section: Questões éTicas Na Comunicação Científicaunclassified

Questões éticas na comunicação científica

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Dual or multiple competing affiliations, academic interests, and financial ties of peer reviewers with the pharmaceutical industry are serious threats to the objectivity of experts’ judgments and decisions throughout the peer review process, especially in small professional communities (1). …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Conflicts of interest in biomedical publications: considerations for authors, peer reviewers, and editors

Gasparyan

Ayvazyan²,

Akazhanov³

et al. 2013

Croat Med J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article overviews evidence on common instances of conflict of interest (COI) in research publications from general and specialized fields of biomedicine. Financial COIs are viewed as the most powerful source of bias, which may even distort citation outcomes of sponsored publications. The urge to boost journal citation indicators by stakeholders of science communication is viewed as a new secondary interest, which may compromize the interaction between authors, peer reviewers, and editors. Comprehensive policies on disclosure of financial and non-financial COIs in scholarly journals are presented as proxies of their indexing in evidence-based databases, and examples of successful medical journals are discussed in detail. Reports on clinical trials, systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and clinical practice guidelines may be unduly influenced by author-pharmaceutical industry relations, but these publications do not always contain explicit disclosures to allow the readers to judge the reliability of the published conclusions and practice-changing recommendations. The article emphasizes the importance of adhering to the guidance on COI from learned associations such as the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). It also considers joint efforts of authors, peer reviewers, and editors as a foundation for appropriately defining and disclosing potential COIs.

show abstract

Conflict of Interest in Science Communication: More than a Financial IssueReport from Esteve Foundation Discussion Group, April 2009

Cited by 20 publications

References 29 publications

How researchers perceive research misconduct in biomedicine and how they would prevent it: A qualitative study in a small scientific community

How researchers perceive research misconduct in biomedicine and how they would prevent it: A qualitative study in a small scientific community

Questões éticas na comunicação científica

Conflicts of interest in biomedical publications: considerations for authors, peer reviewers, and editors

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About