SynthesisScience and engineering ethics2019
Integrity in Biomedical Research: A Systematic Review of Studies in China.
Synthesis in Science and engineering ethics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Toward contextualized research integrity in higher education: a fuzzy-set analysis of individual and organizational configurations among university faculty.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- A multicenter cross-sectional study on perceptions and peer-reported prevalence of research misconduct among Chinese medical postgraduates.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Favorable research environment is a key determinant of research integrity according to a ten-country survey across Central and Eastern Europe.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Indirect feedback as a tool for identifying academic misconduct: a cross-sectional multicentral study among medical students.BMC medical education · 2025Article
- Status of scientific research integrity knowledge in dental undergraduates from 34 universities in China.BMC medical ethics · 2025Article
- Knowledge, attitudes and practices about research misconduct among medical residents in southwest China: a cross-sectional study.BMC medical education · 2024Article
- Current situation and influence factors of scientific integrity in China: A multicenter survey.Asia-Pacific journal of oncology nursing · 2024Article
- Knowledge and attitudes of Chinese medical postgraduates toward research ethics and research ethics committees: a cross-sectional study.BMC medical education · 2023Article
- The Cultural Context of Plagiarism and Research Misconduct in the Asian Region.Journal of Korean medical science · 2023Review
- Do biomedical researchers differ in their perceptions of plagiarism across Europe? Findings from an online survey among leading universities.BMC medical ethics · 2022Article
- Ethical Perspectives of Chinese and United States Physicians at Initiation of a Research Collaborative.Accountability in research · 2022Article
- The Moral Consideration of Artificial Entities: A Literature Review.Science and engineering ethics · 2021Review
- Perceptions of plagiarism by biomedical researchers: an online survey in Europe and China.BMC medical ethics · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Recent empirical evidence has demonstrated that research misconduct occurs to a substantial degree in biomedical research. It has been suggested that scientific integrity is also of concern in China, but this seems to be based largely on anecdotal evidence. We, therefore, sought to explore the Chinese situation, by making a systematic review of published empirical studies on biomedical research integrity in China. One of our purposes was also to summarize the existing body of research published in Chinese. We searched the China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang Data, PubMed and Web of Science for potentially relevant studies, and included studies meeting our inclusion criteria, i.e. mainly those presenting empirically obtained data about the practice of research in China. All the data was extracted and synthesized using an inductive approach. Twenty-one studies were included for review. Two studies used qualitative methods (interviews) and nineteen studies used quantitative methods (questionnaires). Studies involved mainly medical postgraduates and nurses and they investigated awareness, attitudes, perceptions and experiences of research integrity and misconduct. Most of the participants in these 21 studies reported that research integrity is of great importance and that they obey academic norms during their research. Nevertheless, the occurrence of research misbehaviors, such as fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, improper authorship and duplicate submission was also reported. Strengthening research integrity training, developing the governance system and improving the scientific evaluation system were areas of particular attention in several studies. Our review demonstrates that a substantial number of articles have been devoted to research integrity in China, but only a few studies provide empirical evidence. With more safeguard measures of research integrity being taken in China, it would be crucial to conduct more research to explore researchers' in-depth perceptions and evaluate the changes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
29721845What 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.