Research misconduct

Clinical Radiology

Volumn 58, Issue 7, 2003, Pages 499-504

  Gilbert, Fiona J ^a   Denison, A R ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ABERDEEN   (United Kingdom)

^b NHS GRAMPIAN   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Duplicate publication; Fraud; Good research practice; Plagiarism; Research misconduct; Scientific misconduct

Indexed keywords

FORGERY; HUMAN; INFORMED CONSENT; MEDICAL ETHICS; MEDICAL LITERATURE; MEDICAL RESEARCH; MEDICAL SOCIETY; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROFESSIONAL MISCONDUCT; PUBLICATION; RADIOLOGY; REVIEW;

EID: 0038759768     PISSN: 00099260     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0009-9260(03)00176-4     Document Type: Review

References (41)

1. Lock S. Misconduct in medical research: does it exist in Britain? BMJ, 1988;297:1531-1535.
2. Smith R. Misconduct in research: editors respond. BMJ, 1997;315: 201-202.
3. Committee on Publication Ethics. The COPE Report, 2000. 2000.
4. London Royal College of Physicians, Fraud and Misconduct in Medical Research. London: RCPL, 1991.
5. Nylenna M, Andersen D, Dahlquist G, et al. Handling of scientific dishonesty in the Nordic countries. National Committees on Scientific Dishonesty in the Nordic Countries. Lancet, 1999;354:57-61.
6. Commission on Research Integrity, Integrity and Misconduct in Research. Washington: DHHS, 1996.
7. Medical Research Council, Policy and Procedures for Inquiring into Allegations of Scientific Misconduct. London: MRC, 1997.
8. Joint Consensus Conference on Misconduct in Biomedical Research. Supplement 7. 2000; Proceedings of the Royal College of Physicians of Edinburgh.
9. Armstong JD. Plagiarism: what is it, whom does it offend, and how does one deal with it? AJR Am J Roentgenol, 1993;161:479-484.
10. Haramati N, Amis EJ. Plagiarism. An odious accusation. Worst if false. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 1994;163:725-730.
11. Rogers LF. Salami slicing, shotgunning, and the ethics of authorship. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 1999;173:265.
12. General Medical Council, Good Medical Practice. London: GMC, 1998 Available at: http://www.mrc.ac.uk/pdf-good_research_practice.pdf
13. The Ionising Radiation (Medical Exposure) Regulations. 2000. Crown Copyright.
14. Friedman PJ. Standards for authorship and publication in academic radiology. Association of University Radiologists Ad Hoc Committee on Standards for the Responsible Conduct of Research. Radiology, 1993;189:33-34.
15. Medical Research Council, Good Research Practice. London: MRC, 2000.
16. Faculty of Medicine Harvard University. Faculty Policies on Integrity in Science. 2000.
17. Rogers LF. In any language. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 2000;174:1487.
18. Farthing MJG. Research misconduct. Gut, 1997;41:1-2.
19. Farthing MJG. Gut in 1999. Gut, 1999;44:1.
20. Rogers LF. Duplicate publication or not? Case 1. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 2000;174:1789-1790.
21. Rogers LF. Duplicate publication or not? Case 2. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 2000;174:1790-1791.
22. Rogers LF. Duplicate publications: it's not so much the duplicity as it is the deceit. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 1999;172:1-2.
23. Geggie D. A survey of newly appointed consultants' attitudes towards research fraud. J Med Ethics, 2001;27:344-346.
24. Eysenbach G. Medical students see that academic misconduct is common. BMJ, 2001;322:1307.
25. Engler RL, Covell JW, Friedman PJ, et al. Misrepresentation and responsibility in medical research. N Engl J Med, 1987;317: 1383-1389.
26. Rogers LF. Notice of duplicate publication. AJR 1997; 168: 207-212. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1999; 173: 855-856.
27. Rogers LF. Notice of duplicate publication, AJR 1998; 171: 1643-1644. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1999; 173: 856.
28. Rogers LF. Notice of duplicate publication, AJR 1999; 172: 35-37. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2000; 174: 872-873.
29. Varghese JC, Liddell RP, Farrell MA, et al. The diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography and ultrasound compared with direct cholangiography in the detection of choledocholithiasis. Clin Radiol, 1999;54:604-614.
30. Varghese JC, Liddell RP, Farrell MA, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography and ultrasound compared with direct cholangiography in the detection of choledocholithiasis. Clin Radiol, 2000;55:25-35.
31. The Board of the Faculty of Clinical Radiology, A Guide to Radiological Research. The Royal College of Radiologists, 1997 BFCR 3.
32. Weissberg P. Research in clinical training. BMJ, 2002;325:S97.
33. Data Protection Act 1998.
34. General Medical Council, Good Medical Practice. London: GMC, 2001 Available at: http://www.gmc-uk.org/standards/good.htm.
35. The Wellcome Trust, Guidelines on Good Research Practice. London: The Wellcome Trust, 2002 Available at: http://www.wellcome.ac.uk/en/1/awtvispolgrpgid.html.
36. Good Clinical Practice: The Tripartite Harmonised ICH Guidelines. Notes for Guidance CPMP/768/97. 2002. Available at: http://www.ich.org/pdfICH/e6.pdf.
37. Association of Medical Research Charities, Guidelines on Good Research Practice, 2002 Available at: http://www.amrc.org.uk/aboutus/GoodResearchPractice.PDF.
38. Association of British Pharmaceutical Industry. Good Clinical (Research) Practice Guidelines. ABPI. 1992.
39. Farthing M, Horton R, Smith R. UK's failure to act on research misconduct. Lancet, 2000;356:2030.
40. Office of Research Integrity. 2002. http://www.ori.dhhs.gov/.
41. http://www.show.scot.nhs.uk/cso/index.htm.