ArticleLife sciences, society and policy2019
Addressing research integrity challenges: from penalising individual perpetrators to fostering research ecosystem quality care.
Article in Life sciences, society and policy, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 42 citations in OpenAlex.
- Status of scientific research integrity knowledge in dental undergraduates from 34 universities in China.BMC medical ethics · 2025Article
- How to embed ethics into laboratory research.Accountability in research · 2024Article
- How Competition for Funding Impacts Scientific Practice: Building Pre-fab Houses but no Cathedrals.Science and engineering ethics · 2024Article
- Exploring the dimensions of responsible research systems and cultures: a scoping review.Royal Society open science · 2024Article
- Do we measure or compute polygenic risk scores? Why language matters.Human genetics · 2022Article
- Assessing the climate for research ethics in labs: Development and validation of a brief measure.Accountability in research · 2022Article
- Elevating the impact of conservation physiology by building a community devoted to excellence, transparency, ethics, integrity and mutual respect.Conservation physiology · 2022Article
- Important Topics for Fostering Research Integrity by Research Performing and Research Funding Organizations: A Delphi Consensus Study.Science and engineering ethics · 2021Review
- Practices for Research Integrity Promotion in Research Performing Organisations and Research Funding Organisations: A Scoping Review.Science and engineering ethics · 2021Article
- Integrating Integrity: The Organizational Translation of Policies on Research Integrity.Science and engineering 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
2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Concern for and interest in research integrity has increased significantly during recent decades, both in academic and in policy discourse. Both in terms of diagnostics and in terms of therapy, the tendency in integrity discourse has been to focus on strategies of individualisation (detecting and punishing individual deviance). Other contributions to the integrity debate, however, focus more explicitly on environmental factors, e.g. on the quality and resilience of research ecosystems, on institutional rather than individual responsibilities, and on the quality of the research culture. One example of this is the Bonn PRINTEGER Statement. This editorial to the LSSP thematic series (article collection) entitled Addressing integrity challenges in research: the institutional dimension invites authors to contribute to the research integrity debate. Notably, we are interested in submissions addressing issues such as institutional responsibilities, changes in the research climate, duties of research managers and research performing or research funding organisations (RPOs and RFOs) as well as new approaches to integrity education.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.