Research misconduct in the UK

Godlee, Fiona; Wager, Elizabeth

doi:10.1136/bmj.d8357

Cited by 17 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 9 publications

(2 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Editorials often mention ''erosion of public trust'' as a damaging outcome of RM cases (e.g., Godlee and Wager 2012); though ''public trust in science'' among individuals may be strongly influenced by opinions regarding science as either a driver of technological innovation or a hinderance of innovation and economic growth by fueling governmental regulation (Gauchat 2012). Considering the dependence of scientific and medical research on public funding, the paucity of comprehensive studies on media coverage of scholarly article retractions and misconduct is surprising (Greenbaum 2009;Rada 2005Rada , 2007.…”

Section: Rising Retraction Rates Have Not Increased Media Attention Omentioning

confidence: 99%

The impact of misconduct on the published medical and non-medical literature, and the news media

Zhang

Grieneisen

2012

Scientometrics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Better understanding of research and publishing misconduct can improve strategies to mitigate their occurrence. In this study, we examine various trends among 2,375 articles retracted due to misconduct in all scholarly fields. Proportions of articles retracted due to ''publication misconduct'' (primarily plagiarism and duplicate publication) or ''distrust data or interpretations'' (primarily research artifacts and unexplained irreproducibility of data) differ significantly between PubMed (35 and 59 %, respectively) and non-PubMed (56 and 27 %) articles and between English-and non-English-speaking author affiliation countries. Retraction rates due to any form of misconduct, adjusted for the size of the literature in different disciplines, vary from 0.22 per 100,000 articles in the Humanities to 7.58 in Medicine and 7.69 in Chemistry. The annual rate of article retractions due to misconduct has increased exponentially since 2001, and the percentage of all retractions involving misconduct allegations has grown from 18.5-29.2 % for each year from 1990-1993 to 55.8-71.9 % for each year from 2007-2010. Despite these increases, the prominence of research integrity in the news media has not changed appreciably over the past 20 years. Articles retracted due to misconduct are found in all major scholarly disciplines. The higher rate of plagiarism among authors from non-English speaking countries may diminish if institutions improved their support for the writing of English manuscripts by their scholars. The training of junior scholars on proper codes of research (and publishing) conduct should be embraced by all disciplines, not just by biomedical fields where the perception of misconduct is high.

show abstract

Section: Rising Retraction Rates Have Not Increased Media Attention Omentioning

confidence: 99%

The impact of misconduct on the published medical and non-medical literature, and the news media

Zhang

Grieneisen

2012

Scientometrics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…But we lack reliable data on the extent and distribution of research misconduct, and few countries have mounted a comprehensive response to misconduct that includes programmes of prevention, investigation, punishment, and correction. The United States, the Scandinavian countries, and Germany have formal programmes [1], but even a country like the United Kingdom that has a long research tradition and has for years been debating research misconduct has failed to mount an adequate response [2]. But what of low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), many of which are investing heavily in research?…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Research Misconduct in Low- and Middle-Income Countries

Ana

Koehlmoos

Smith³

et al. 2013

PLoS Med

110

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The United States of America, Germany and the Scandinavian countries have formal programs to deal with for research misconduct issues but still country like United Kingdom is not being able to respond in adequate manner. (17)…”

Section: Problem Of Research Misconductmentioning

confidence: 99%

Medical research misconduct need regulatory reforms

Bedi¹

2014

Indian J Community Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The medical research misconduct has become a global problem. Except from countries like the USA, China, and Germany the exact figures of misconduct are not available. The research misconduct include fabricating the data, falsifying data, and plagiarism. The irresponsible research practices are publishing research data more than once, conflicts of interest is not declared, selective reporting of data and including an author who has not contributed at all and many more. About 2% of scientists have been found to admit the fabricating the data and 33% researchers were involved in irresponsible research practices. There is no formal regulatory programs available to monitor the research projects. Few developed countries like the USA, Germany, and China tried to develop programs which can monitor the medical research misconduct. There is a need to develop a regulatory system at national and institutional level to regulate the research activity to ensure that good ethical and scientific standards are practiced by medical researchers.

show abstract

Research misconduct in the UK

Abstract: Time to act

Cited by 17 publications

References 9 publications

The impact of misconduct on the published medical and non-medical literature, and the news media

The impact of misconduct on the published medical and non-medical literature, and the news media

Research Misconduct in Low- and Middle-Income Countries

Medical research misconduct need regulatory reforms

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About