Integrity in medical research and publication

Clinical Otolaryngology and Allied Sciences

Volumn 27, Issue 6, 2002, Pages 436-439

  Fenton, John E ^a   Jonesy, A S ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL LIMERICK   (Ireland)

^b UNIVERSITY OF LIVERPOOL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CLINICAL PRACTICE; CLINICAL RESEARCH; EDITORIAL; HEAD AND NECK SURGERY; MEDICAL ETHICS; MEDICAL LITERATURE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY CONTROL; RESPONSIBILITY;

BIOMEDICAL AND BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH;

OTOLARYNGOLOGY; PUBLISHING; SCIENTIFIC MISCONDUCT;

EID: 0036941667     PISSN: 03077772     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2273.2002.00623.x     Document Type: Editorial

References (44)

1. Gunsalus C.K. (1993) Institutional structure to ensure research integrity. Acad. Med. 68 (Suppl. 3), S33-S38
2. Petersdorf R.G. (1989) A matter of integrity. Acad. Med. 64, 119-123
3. Riis P. (2001) Scientific dishonesty: European reflections. J. Clin. Pathol. 54, 4-6
4. Simmons R.L., Polk H.C., Jr, Williams B. et al. (1991) Misconduct and fraud in research: Social and legislative issues symposium of the Society of University Surgeons. Surgery 110, 1-7
5. Jacobsen G. & hals A. (1995) Medical investigators' views about ethics and fraud in medical research. J. R. Coll. Phys. 29, 405-409
6. Wilkie T. (1996) Sources in science: Who can we trust? Lancet 347, 1308-1311
7. Sponholz G. (2000) Teaching scientific integrity and research ethics. Forensic Sci. Int. 113, 511-514
8. Hunter J.M. (2000) Ethics in publishing; are we practising to the highest possible standards? Br. J Anaesth. 85, 341-343
9. Onwude J.L, Staines A, Lilford R.J. (1993) Multiple author trend worst in medicine. BMJ 306 (6888), 1345
10. Carney A.S, Nunez D.A, Nair S.B. et al. (1999) Trends in the UK contribution to the otolaryngological literature. Clin. Otolaryngol. 24, 26-30
11. Wilcox L.J. (1998) Authorship: The coin of the realm, the source of complaints. JAMA 280, 216-217
12. Smith R. (1997) Peer review: Reform or revolution. BMJ 315, 759-760
13. Smith J. (1991) Preventing fraud. BMJ 302, 362-363
14. Schneider C. (2000) Safeguarding good scientific practice: New institutional approaches in Germany. Sci. Eng. Ethics 6, 49-56
15. Anon (2000) Managing allegations of scientific misconduct: A guidance document for editors. J. Child Neurol. 15, 609-613
16. Committee on Publication Ethics [World Wide Web site accessed 25 March 2002]. Available from URL: http://www.publicationethics.org.uk
17. Gillenwater J.Y. & Whitfield H.N. (2000) Editorial. BJU Int. 85, 1
18. Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) (2000) Guidelines on good publication practice. BJU Int. 85, 2-7
19. Smith R. (2000) What is research misconduct? COPE Report 2000. [World Wide Web site accessed 25 March 2002]. Available from URL: http://www.publicationethics.org.uk
20. Raub W.F. (2001) Research misconduct. Head Neck 23, 71-72
21. Shore E.G. (1993) Sanctions and remediation for research misconduct: Differential diagnosis, treatment, and prevention. Acad. Med. 68 (Suppl. 3), S44-S48
22. Engler R.L., Covell J.W., Freidman P.J. et al. (1987) Misrepresentation and responsibility in medical research. N Engl. J. Med. 317, 1383-1389
23. Gleeson M. & Biddle S. (2000) Duplicate publishing and the least publishable unit. J. Sports Med. 18, 227-228
24. Angell M. (1986) Publish or perish: A proposal. Ann. Intern. Med. 104, 261-261
25. Bhopal R., Rankin J., McColl Thomas L. et al. (1997) The vexed question of authorship: Views of researchers in a British medical faculty. BMJ 314, 1009-1012
26. Korenman S.G., Berk R., Wenger N.S. et al. (1998) Evaluation of the research norms of scientists and administrators responsible for academic research integrity. JAMA 279, 41-47
27. Flanagin A., Carey L.A., Fontanarosa P.B. et al. (1998) Prevalence of articles with honorary authors and ghost authors in peer-reviewed medical journals. JAMA 280, 222-224
28. Kerr D. (1995) Fraud in science: Time for a second look? J. R. Coll Phys. 29, 461
29. Powers R.D. & Calkins K.K. (1998) Multiple authorship revisited: How much is enough? Am. J. Emerg. Med. 16, 708-709
30. Bailey B.J. (2000) What is an author? Laryngoscope 110, 1787-1788
31. Benninger M.S. (2001) Why is defining authorship so important? Otolaryngol. Head Neck Surg. 124, 1
32. Rennie D., Yank V. & Emanuel L. (1997) When authorship fails: A proposal to make contributors accountable. JAMA 278, 579-585
33. Mirsky S. (2002) Copy that: Technology is making it harder for word thieves to earn outrageous fortunes. Sci. Am. 286, 82
34. Bebeau M.J. & Davis E.L. (1996) Survey of ethical issues in dental research. J. Dent. Res. 75, 845-855
35. Gordon A.G. (1998) Never cite unseen. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 178, 627
36. Caelleigh A.S. (1997) Clinical trials and meta-analysis. The Medical Editors Trial Amnesty (META). Acad. Med. 72, 1030-1031
37. Caelleigh A.S. (1993) Role of the journal editor in sustaining integrity in research. Acad. Med. 68 (Suppl. 9), S23-S29
38. Eysenbach G. (2000) Report of a case of cyberplagiarism - And reflections on detecting and preventing academic misconduct using the Internet. J. Med. Internet Res. 2, E4
39. Macrina F.L. & Munro C.L. (1993) Graduate teaching in principles of scientific integrity. Acad. Med. 68 (12), 879-884.
40. Yankauer A. (1990) Editor's report: Scientific misconduct and the responsibility of journal editors. AJPH 80, 399-400
41. Anon (2002) Dazed and confused: If the experts can't agree, what chance for the rest of us? New Sci. 174 (2338), 3
42. Parrish D.M. (1999) Scientific misconduct and correcting the scientific literature. Acad. Med. 74, 221-230
43. Stecneck N.H. (1999) Confronting misconduct in science in the 1980s and 1990s: What has and has not been accomplished? Sci. Eng. Ethics 5, 161-176
44. Lynch A. (1994) Ethics in dental research. Publication of research: The ethical dimension. J. Dent. Res. 73, 1778-1782