Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorSivasubramaniam, shivadas
dc.contributor.authorConsetino, M
dc.contributor.authorRibeiro, L
dc.contributor.authorMarino, F
dc.date.accessioned2021-04-07T12:53:19Z
dc.date.available2021-04-07T12:53:19Z
dc.date.issued2021-04-01
dc.identifier.citationSivasubramaniam, S.D., Cosentino, M., Ribeiro, L. and Marino, F., (2021). 'Unethical practices within medical research and publication–An exploratory study'. International Journal for Educational Integrity, 17(1), pp. 1-13.en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1007/s40979-021-00072-y
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10545/625694
dc.description.abstractThe data produced by the scientific community impacts on academia, clinicians, and the general public; therefore, the scientific community and other regulatory bodies have been focussing on ethical codes of conduct. Despite the measures taken by several research councils, unethical research, publishing and/or reviewing behaviours still take place. This exploratory study considers some of the current unethical practices and the reasons behind them and explores the ways to discourage these within research and other professional disciplinary bodies. These interviews/discussions with PhD students, technicians, and academics/principal investigators (PIs) (N=110) were conducted mostly in European higher education institutions including UK, Italy, Ireland, Portugal, Czech Republic and Netherlands. Through collegiate discussions, sharing experiences and by examining previously published/reported information, authors have identified several less reported behaviours. Some of these practices are mainly influenced either by the undue institutional expectations of research esteem or by changes in the journal review process. These malpractices can be divided in two categories relating to (a) methodological malpractices including data management, and (b) those that contravene publishing ethics. The former is mostly related to “committed bias”, by which the author selectively uses the data to suit their own hypothesis, methodological malpractice relates to selection of out-dated protocols that are not suited to the intended work. Although these are usually unintentional, incidences of intentional manipulations have been reported to authors of this study. For example, carrying out investigations without positive (or negative) controls; but including these from a previous study. Other methodological malpractices include unfair repetitions to gain statistical significance, or retrospective ethical approvals. In contrast, the publication related malpractices such as authorship malpractices, ethical clearance irregularities have also been reported. The findings also suggest a globalised approach with clear punitive measures for offenders is needed to tackle this problem.en_US
dc.description.sponsorshipN/Aen_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherSpringer Natureen_US
dc.relation.urlhttps://edintegrity.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1007/s40979-021-00072-yen_US
dc.rightsCC0 1.0 Universal*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/*
dc.subjectMedical researchen_US
dc.subjectethicsen_US
dc.subjectscientific communityen_US
dc.titleUnethical practices within medical research and publication – An exploratory study.en_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.eissn1833-2595
dc.contributor.departmentUniversity of Derbyen_US
dc.contributor.departmentUniversity of Insubria, Via Ravasi, 2, 21100, Varese, VA, Italyen_US
dc.identifier.journalInternational Journal for Educational Integrityen_US
dcterms.dateAccepted2021-01-24
refterms.dateFOA2021-04-01T00:00:00Z
dc.author.detail786433en_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Name:
s40979-021-00072-y (Unethical ...
Size:
730.8Kb
Format:
PDF
Description:
Main open access article

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

CC0 1.0 Universal
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as CC0 1.0 Universal