ArticleJournal of research in medical sciences : the official journal of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences2012
Fraud and deceit in medical research.
Article in Journal of research in medical sciences : the official journal of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- On power and its corrupting effects: the effects of power on human behavior and the limits of accountability systems.Communicative & integrative biology · 2023Review
- Comments on: Glycerol-preserved corneal tissue in emergency corneal transplantation: An alternative for fresh corneal tissue in COVID-19 crisis.Indian journal of ophthalmology · 2021Article
- Psychometric properties of Persian version of the research misconduct questionnaire (PRMQ).Journal of medical ethics and history of medicine · 2020Article
- Research misconduct and data fraud in clinical trials: prevalence and causal factors.International journal of clinical oncology · 2016Review
- Ethics in medical research and publication.International journal of preventive medicine · 2014Review
- Ethics in Research and Publication.Journal of Indian Association of Pediatric SurgeonsReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Publication of medical research is the cornerstone for the propagation and dissemination of medical knowledge, culminating in significant effects on the health of the world's population. However, instances of individuals and institutions subverting the ethos of honesty and integrity on which medical research is built in order to advance personal ambitions have been well documented. Many definitions to describe this unethical behavior have been postulated, although the most descriptive is the "FFP" (fabrication, falsification, and plagiarism) model put forward by the United States' Office of Research Integrity. Research misconduct has many ramifications of which the world's media are all too keen to demonstrate. Many high-profile cases the world over have demonstrated this lack of ethics when performing medical research. Many esteemed professionals and highly regarded world institutions have succumbed to the ambitions of a few, who for personal gains, have behaved unethically in pursuit of their own ideals. Although institutions have been set up to directly confront these issues, it would appear that a lot more is still required on the part of journals and their editors to combat this behavioral pattern. Individuals starting out at very junior positions in medical research ought to be taught the basics of medical research ethics so that populations are not failed by the very people they are turning to for assistance at times of need. This article provides a review of many of the issues of research misconduct and allows the reader to reflect and think through their own experiences of research. This hopefully will allow individuals to start asking questions on, what is an often, a poorly discussed topic in medical research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
23833585PMC3702092What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.