Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23751027›Full record

ArticleClinical and translational science2013

Assessing the need for a research ethics remediation program.

James M DuBois, Emily E Anderson, John Chibnall

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical and translational science, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Five Dimensions of Research Ethics: A Stakeholder Framework for Creating a Climate of Research Integrity.Academic medicine : journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges · 2018
    Article
  3. The Professionalism and Integrity in Research Program: Description and Preliminary Outcomes.Academic medicine : journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges · 2018
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Need for a research ethics remediation program.Clinical and translational science · 2013
    Article
  6. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

James M DuBoisBander Center for Medical Business Ethics, Saint Louis University, St. Louis, MO, USA. jamesofthewood@gmail.com
Emily E Anderson
John Chibnall

Funding

Washington University Institute of Clinical and Translational Sciences (UL1)UL1RR024992 · NCRR · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI EVANOFF, BRADLEY A · 2007 to 2011
$45.4M
Washington University Institute of Clinical and Translational SciencesUL1TR000448 · NCATS · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI EVANOFF, BRADLEY A · 2012 to 2016
$41.4M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR000448NCRR NIH HHS 3UL1RR024992-05S2NCRR NIH HHS UL1 RR024992
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

With supplement funding to the Washington University CTSA, the Restoring Professionalism and Integrity in Research (RePAIR) program was developed at Saint Louis University to meet the remediation needs of institutions nationwide regarding investigators who violate research regulations. With the aim of determining the frequency and kinds of wrongdoing at leading research institutions in the United States, as well as institutional responses and levels of interest in a formal remediation program, an online questionnaire was distributed by email to a research integrity officer (RIO) and institutional review board (IRB) chair at all medical schools and comprehensive doctoral institutions in the United States (N = 194). One hundred sixty-one individuals responded (44%) representing 66% of institutions. For those institutions that had both RIOs and IRB chairs responding, 96% had investigated at least one case over the past 2 years; the modal individual response was 3-5 cases, with a range from 0 to more than 16 cases. The most common forms of wrongdoing were violations of procedure, informed consent, research integrity (fabrication, falsification, plagiarism), privacy, and conflict of interest policies. Most RIOs and IRB chairs expressed interest in the RePAIR program, despite concerns about costs and faculty resistance.

Indexed as

CurriculumEthics, ResearchNeeds AssessmentAcademies and InstitutesData CollectionEthics Committees, ResearchHumans

Identifiers

PMID23751027
PMCPMC3683893

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.