Handling of scientific dishonesty in the Nordic countries

Lancet

Volumn 354, Issue 9172, 1999, Pages 57-61

  Nylenna, Magne ^a   Andersen, Daniel ^b   Dahlquist, Gisela ^c   Sarvas, Matti ^d   Aakvaag, Asbjørn ^a  

^a Norges forskningsrad   (Norway)

^b Danish Research Agency   (Denmark)

^c Swedish Medical Research Council   (Sweden)

^d Natl Res Ethics Council of Finland   (Finland)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DENMARK; ETHICS; FINLAND; HUMAN; LEGAL ASPECT; MEDICAL RESEARCH; NORWAY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PUBLICATION; REVIEW; SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE; SWEDEN; WRITING;

EID: 0033519913     PISSN: 01406736     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(98)07133-5     Document Type: Review

References (23)

1. Bekkelund S.I., Hegstad A.C., Førde O.H. Uredeighet i medisinsk og helsefaglig forskning i Norge [Scientific dishonesty in medical research in Norway]. Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen. 115:1995;3148-3151. [In Norwegian with English summary].
2. Lock, S. Research misconduct: résumé of recent events. In: Lock S, Wells F, eds. Fraud and misconduct in medical research, 2nd edn. London: BMJ Publishing Group, 1996.
3. Woolf P.K. Deception in scientific research. Jurimetrics J. 29:1988;67-95.
4. Smith R. Time to face up to research misconduct. BMJ. 312:1996;789-790.
5. Dealing with deception. Lancet. 347:1996;843.
6. Evered D., Lazar P. Misconduct in medical research. Lancet. 345:1995;1161-1162.
7. Smith R. Misconduct in research: editors respond. The Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) is formed. BMJ. 315:1997;201-202.
8. Annual report 1998. 1998;BMJ Publishing Group, London.
9. Maus K.W. The Norwegian research system - statistics and indicators. [In Norwegian]:1997;Norwegian Research Council, Oslo.
10. Andersen D., Attrup L., Axelsen N., Riis P. Scientific dishonesty & good clinical practice. 1992;Danish Medical Research Council, Copenhagen.
11. National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, Institute of Medicine. Responsible science: ensuring the integrity of the research process, vol 1. Washington DC: National Academy Press, 1992.
12. Buzzelli, D.E. The definition of misconduct in science: a view from NSF. Science 1993; 259: 584-585, 647-648.
13. Schachman HK.What is misconduct in science? Science 1993; 261: 148-49, 183.
14. Guidelines for good scientific practice. Copenhagen: Danish Committee on Scientific Dishonesty, 1998.
15. Danish Committee on Scientific Dishonesty. Annual reports 1993-96. Copenhagen: Danish Research Councils, 1994-97.
16. Wilcox L.J. Authorship. The coin of the realm, the source of complaints. JAMA. 280:1998;216-217.
17. Rennie D., Yank V., Emanuel L. When authorship fails: a proposal to make contributors accountable. JAMA. 278:1997;579-585.
18. Uniform requirements for manuscripts submitted to biomedical journals. Ann Intern Med. 126:1997;34-47.
19. Poon P. Legal protections for the scientific misconduct whistleblower. J Law Med Ethics. 23:1995;88-95.
20. LaFollette M.C. Stealing into print. 1992;University of California Press, Berkeley, CA.
21. Consequences of whistleblowing for the whistleblower in misconduct in science cases. 1995;Office of Research Integrity, Rockville, MD.
22. Integrity and misconduct in research. Report of the Commission on Research Integrity to the Secretary of Health and Human Services, the House Committee on Commerce and the Senate Committee on Labor and Human Resources. 1995;US Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Rockville, MD.
23. Farthing M.J.G. An editor's response to fraudsters. BMJ. 316:1998;1729-1731.