Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42421553›Full record

ArticleInternal medicine journal2026

Strengthening Australia's research integrity system.

Warwick Anderson, Kerry Breen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Internal medicine journal, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Warwick AndersonBiomedical Discovery Institute, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7130-3530
Kerry BreenDepartment of Forensic Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Misconduct in research is a serious issue and is probably increasing. To grapple fully with this, to protect the reputation of honest researchers and to improve public accountability, the Australian research integrity system needs strengthening. The Australian Code for the Responsible Conduct of Research must be revised to mandate how research institutions investigate allegations of research misconduct. The Australian Research Integrity Committee must be empowered by government to scrutinise any institution's investigation, demand a re-investigation when needed at the institution's expense and to report publicly on the incidence of allegations of misconduct and the outcomes of all investigations.

Indexed as

Biomedical ResearchScientific MisconductAustraliaHumansAccountabilitAustralian Research Integrity CommitteeAustralian Code for the Responsible Conduct of ResearchNational Health and Medical Research CouncilResearch Misconduct

Identifiers

PMID42421553
PMCPMC13458222

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.