ReviewBMJ open2025
Honest yet unacceptable research practices: when research becomes a health risk.
Review in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundExamples of poor research practices have received much attention in academic and public arenas. Such practices persist and threaten the health of the public and the reputation and impact of research and researchers.
objectiveIn this article, we argue that research-though intended to improve health-can lead to patient harm through the proliferation of honest (though occasionally dishonest) yet unacceptable research practices. SUMMARY OF KEY ARGUMENTS: We argue that deliberate dishonest research practices-termed questionable research practices-are widely prevalent and insidious and influenced by both individual and cultural factors. Drawing on credible conceptualisations of poor research practices, we define honest yet unacceptable research practices to be different from questionable research practices involving dishonesty, but just as serious due to their wide prevalence and damaging impacts. Finally, we present recommendations for people and organisations to better protect patients' interests from honest yet unacceptable research practices.
conclusionOur recommendations can serve as the basis for preventing honest yet unacceptable poor research practices to safeguard public trust in health professions, researchers and practices.
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.