Promoting Research Integrity in Africa: An African Voice of Concern on Research Misconduct and the Way Forward

Developing World Bioethics

Volumn 14, Issue 3, 2014, Pages 158-166

  Kombe, Francis ^a   Anunobi, Eucharia Nkechinyere ^b,c   Tshifugula, Nyanyukweni Pandeni ^d   Wassenaar, Douglas ^e   Njadingwe, Dimpho ^f   Mwalukore, Salim ^g   Chinyama, Jonathan ^h   Randrianasolo, Bodo ⁱ   Akindeh, Perpetua ^j   Dlamini, Priscilla S ^h   Ramiandrisoa, Felasoa Noroseheno ^e   Ranaivo, Naina ^k  

^a KWTRP   (Kenya)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA AT BIRMINGHAM   (United States)

^c Asokoro Hospital   (Nigeria)

^d UNIVERSITY OF NAMIBIA   (Namibia)

^e UNIVERSITY OF KWAZULU NATAL   (South Africa)

^f UNIVERSITY OF BOTSWANA   (Botswana)

^g KENYA MEDICAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (Kenya)

^h Diploma in Clinical Medical Sciences Health Research Ethics   (Nigeria)

ⁱ UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA   (United States)

^j Cameroon Bioethics Initiative   (Cameroon)

^k Tianshi Company   (Madagascar)

more..

Author keywords

Africa; Ethics review committees; Research ethics; Scientific research misconduct

Indexed keywords

AFRICA; ETHICS; HUMAN; PERSONNEL; RESEARCH ETHICS; SCIENTIFIC MISCONDUCT;

AFRICA; ETHICS, RESEARCH; HUMANS; RESEARCH PERSONNEL; SCIENTIFIC MISCONDUCT;

EID: 84939265021     PISSN: 14718731     EISSN: 14718847     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/dewb.12024     Document Type: Article

References (61)

1. Promoting research integrity: a new global effort. Lancet 2012; 380: 1445.
2. Empirical Realities of Scientific Misconduct in Publicly Funded Research: What can we learn from ORI investigations of U.S. cases in the biomedical and behavioral sciences? Andrea Pozzi & Paul A. David. Available at: http://www-siepr.stanford.edu/papers/pdf/Pozzi-David_Presentation_MisconductRealities_v7bis_4up_15pages.pdf [Accessed 28 Jan 2013]
3. The Concordat to Support Research Integrity, Universities UK, London 2012. ISBN 978-1-84036-273-2N, London: Available at: http://www.universitiesuk.ac.uk/Publications/Documents/TheConcordatToSupportResearchIntegrity.pdf [Accessed 28 Jan 2013].
4. Federal Policy on Research Misconduct, 2002. Available at: http://www.aps.org/policy/statements/upload/federalpolicy.pdf. [Accessed 28 Jan 2013].
5. B. Schneider & U. Schuklenk. Module six: special issues. Dev World Bioeth 2005; 5: 92-108.
6. G. True, L.B. Alexander & K.A. Richman. Misbehaviors of front-line research personnel and the integrity of community-based research. J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics 2011; 6: 3-12
7. R. de Vries, M.S. Anderson & B.C. Martinson. Normal Misbehavior: Scientists Talk about the Ethics of Research. J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics 2006; 1: 43-50.
8. E.J. Hackett. A new perspective on scientific misconduct. Acad Med 1993; 68: S72-S76.
9. D.S. Kornfeld. Perspective: research misconduct: the search for a remedy. Ibid. 2012; 87: 877-882.
10. S.M. Vasconcelos, N.H. Steneck, M. Anderson, H. Masuda, M. Palacios, J.C. Pinto & M.M. Sorenson. The new geography of scientific collaborations. Changing patterns in the geography of science pose ethical challenges for collaborations between established and emerging scientific powers. EMBO Rep 2012; 13: 404-407.
11. International ethical guidelines for biomedical research involving human subjects. Bull Med Ethics 2002: 17-23
12. K.G. Alberti. Multicentre research ethics committees: has the cure been worse than the disease? No, but idiosyncracies and obstructions to good research must be removed. BMJ 2000; 320: 1157-1158
13. E.J. Emanuel, D. Wendler, J. Killen & C. Grady. What makes clinical research in developing countries ethical? The benchmarks of ethical research. J Infect Dis 2004; 189: 930-937
14. C. IJsselmuiden, D. Marais, D. Wassenaar & B. Mokgatla-Moipolai. Mapping african ethical review committee activity onto capacity needs: the marc initiative and hrweb's interactive database of recs in Africa. Dev World Bioeth 2012; 12: 74-86
15. J. Legemaate. The CIOMS guidelines for biomedical research involving human subjects. Eur J Health Law 1994; 1: 161-165
16. C. Weijer. Protecting communities in research: philosophical and pragmatic challenges. Camb Q Healthc Ethics 1999; 8: 501-513
17. C. Weijer & E.J. Emanuel. Ethics. Protecting communities in biomedical research. Science 2000; 289: 1142-1144.
18. S. Molyneux & P.W. Geissler. Ethics and the ethnography of medical research in Africa. Soc Sci Med 2008; 67: 685-695.
19. D.B. Resnik & A.E. Shamoo. The singapore statement on research integrity. Account Res 2011; 18: 71-75, A. Marusic. The Singapore statement on research integrity. Croat Med J 2010; 51: 381-382.
20. P. Okonta & T. Rossouw. Prevalence of Scientific Misconduct Among a Group of Researchers in Nigeria. Dev World Bioeth 2012.
21. IAC and IAP; Responsible Conduct in the Global Research Enterprise, A Policy Report: Available at: http://www.interacademies.net/File.aspx?id=19789. [Accessed 28 Jan 2013].
22. D.S. Kornfeld. Perspective: research misconduct: the search for a remedy. Acad Med 2012; 87: 877-882.
23. IAC and IAP; Responsible Conduct in the Global Research Enterprise, A Policy Report: Available at: http://www.interacademies.net/File.aspx?id=19789 [Accessed 28 Jan 2013].
24. Federal Policy on Research Misconduct. 2002. Available at: http://www.aps.org/policy/statements/upload/federalpolicy.pdf. [Accessed 28 Jan 2013].
25. D. Fanelli. How many scientists fabricate and falsify research? A systematic review and meta-analysis of survey data. PLoS One 2009; 4: e5738
26. D. Fanelli. Do pressures to publish increase scientists' bias? An empirical support from US States Data. PLoS One 2010; 5: e10271
27. D. Fanelli. 'Positive' results increase down the Hierarchy of the Sciences. PLoS One 2010; 5: e10068.
28. G. True, L.B. Alexander & K.A. Richman. Misbehaviors of front-line research personnel and the integrity of community-based research. Ibid. 2011; 6: 3-12.
29. D. Kamuya, S. Theobald, P. Munyoki, D. Koech, W. Geissler and S. Molyneux 'Evolving friendships and shifting ethical dilemmas: fieldworkers' experiences in a short term community based study in Kenya', Developing World Bioethics, in press.
30. A. Newman & R. Jones. Authorship of research papers: ethical and professional issues for short-term researchers. J Med Ethics 2006; 32: 420-423.
31. IAC and IAP; Responsible Conduct in the Global Research Enterprise, A Policy Report: Available at: http://www.interacademies.net/File.aspx?id=19789. [Accessed 28 Jan 2013].
32. Fanelli. How many scientists fabricate and falsify research? A systematic review and meta-analysis of survey data.
33. Kornfeld, Fanelli. How many scientists fabricate and falsify research? A systematic review and meta-analysis of survey data.
34. P. Cleaton-Jones. Scientific misconduct in a breast-cancer chemotherapy trial: response of University of the Witwatersrand. Lancet 2000; 355: 1011-1012.
35. R.B. Weiss, R.M. Rifkin, F.M. Stewart, R.L. Theriault, L.A. Williams, A.A. Herman & R.A. Beveridge. High-dose chemotherapy for high-risk primary breast cancer: an on-site review of the Bezwoda study. Ibid.: 999-1003
36. R.B. Weiss, G.G. Gill & C.A. Hudis. An on-site audit of the South African trial of high-dose chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer and associated publications. J Clin Oncol 2001; 19: 2771-2777.
37. Institutions of Higher Cheating. South Africa Sunday Times: 10 June 2007.
38. C. Willyard. Pfizer lawsuit spotlights ethics of developing world clinical trials. Nat Med 2007; 13: 763
39. J. Lenzer. Secret report surfaces showing that Pfizer was at fault in Nigerian drug tests. BMJ 2006; 332: 1233
40. K. Ahmad. Nigerian government investigates Pfizer drug trial allegations. Lancet 2001; 357: 129.
41. R. Macklin. Bioethics, vulnerability, and protection. Bioethics 2003; 17: 472-486.
42. A.S. Jegede. Understanding informed consent for participation in international health research. Dev World Bioeth 2009; 9: 81-87.
43. Lenzer. Nigerian Doctor Finds HIV 'Cure'. Available at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/740523.stm [Accessed 28 Jan 2013].
44. World Health Organization (WHO). 2005. Handbook for Good Clinical Research Practice (GCP).Guidance for Implementation. Available at: http://apps.who.int/medicinedocs/index/assoc/s14084e/s14084e.pdf [Accessed 28 Jan 2013].
45. Weijer & Emanuel. Ethics. Protecting communities in biomedical research, C. Weijer, G. Goldsand & E.J. Emanuel. Protecting communities in research: current guidelines and limits of extrapolation. Nat Genet 1999; 23: 275-280.
46. U.S Department of Health & Human Services. The Office of Research Integrity. Available at: http://ori.hhs.gov [Accessed 28 Jan 2013].
47. U.S Department of Health & Human Services. Office for Human Research Protections (OHRP). Available at: http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp. [Accessed 28 Jan 2013].
48. U.S. Department of Health & Human Services. Office of Research Integrity. Available at: http://ori.hhs.gov [Accessed 28 Jan 2013].
49. Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues. President Obama Asks Bioethics Commission to Review Protections for Human Research Subjects. Available at: http://bioethics.gov/cms/node/82. [Accessed 28 Jan 2013].
50. Medical Research Council (MRC). Available at: http://www.mrc.ac.uk/Ourresearch/Ethicsresearchguidance/ERPIC/index.htm [Accessed 28 Jan 2013].
51. UK Research Integrity Office. Available at: http://www.ukrio.org [Accessed 28 Jan 2013].
52. The Concordat to Support Research Integrity, Universities UK, London 2012. ISBN 978-1-84036-273-2N, London: Available at: http://www.universitiesuk.ac.uk/Publications/Documents/TheConcordatToSupportResearchIntegrity.pdf [Accessed 28 Jan 2013].
53. Canadian Institute of Health Research. Available at: http://www.cihr-irsc.gc.ca/e/193.html [Accessed 28 Jan 2013].
54. Australian Government. Australian Research Council. Available at: http://www.arc.gov.au/general/research_integrity.htm [Accessed 28 Jan 2013].
55. The National Health Research Ethics Council. A Statutory Body Established Under the National Health Act No 61 of 2003. Available at: http://www.nhrec.org.za [Accessed 28 Jan 2013].
56. R.G. Steen. Retractions in the medical literature: how can patients be protected from risk? J Med Ethics 2012; 38: 228-232
57. R.G. Steen. Retractions in the scientific literature: do authors deliberately commit research fraud? J Med Ethics 2011; 37: 113-117
58. R.G. Steen. Retractions in the scientific literature: is the incidence of research fraud increasing? J Med Ethics 2011; 37: 249-253
59. R.G. Steen. Retractions in the medical literature: how many patients are put at risk by flawed research? J Med Ethics 2011; 37: 688-692.
60. Requirements for Institutional Policies and Procedures on Research Misconduct Under the New PHS Policies on Research Misconduct, 42 CFR Part 93. Available at: http://ori.dhhs.gov/documents/requirmnts.pdf [Accessed 28 Jan 2013].
61. Research Ethics Web. Mapping African Research Ethics Review Capacity. Available at: http://www.researchethicsweb.org [Accessed 28 Jan 2013].