Presentation at a seminar on research ethics, University of Dammam May
24, 2014 by Prof Omar Hasan Kasule
INTRODUCTION
TO RESEARCH MALPRACTICE: prevalence and attitudes
·
Seeds of research malpractice are
in the research proposal
·
Research malpractice is common[1]
·
Violation of ethics reason for
retractions[2]
·
Research malpractice reflects
wrong attitudes
·
Short course can change attitude
to fraud[3]
·
Poor attitude to plagiarism in
Iran[6]
INTRODUCTION
TO RESEARCH MALPRACTICE: causes
·
Research grants are an avenue for
academic promotion and professional growth[7]
·
Competitive nature of scientific
grants may motivate misbehavior
·
Career and reputation from publishing
can motivate misconduct[8]
·
Funding expectations are
associated with research misbehavior: public vs private[9]
·
Research wrong doing in Nigeria
due to knowledge gaps in ethics and the pressure to publish[10]
PROTOCOL:
INVESTIGATORS AND AUTHORSHIP
·
Principal investigator /
co-investigators or sub-investigators must be mentioned
·
All names mentioned must have
substantial recorded contribution
·
The issue of the senior
author/boss/friend/colleague?: scratch my back and I scratch yours
·
All names mentioned must have
agreed to be part of the study
·
Doubtful cases: students,
research assistants, laboratory technicians?
PROTOCOL:
ORIGINALITY
·
Thorough literature review to
make sure this investigation is original
·
Check clearing houses such as
Cochrane and www.clinicaltrials.org
·
Cite and acknowledge all
information used in the proposal
·
Why repeat research already done?
Local experience / training/scientific validation
·
Writing proposals from boiler
plates
PROTOCOL:
PLAGIARISM: definition
·
Create or copy?. Is it possible
to create from nothing?[11].
·
Plagiarism is a complex phenomena
that may be related to memory lapses and not always deliberate deception[12] [13] [14]
·
Un-intended plagiarism: ideas
gained in discussions or from the class room?
·
What if it is your original idea
bit someone already thought of it?
·
Self plagiarism[15]?
PROTOCOL:
PLAGIARISM: detection and avoidance
·
Plagiarism detection services[16]
·
If in doubt run a plagiarism
software.
·
If you are a research
administrator should you write proposals?
PROTOCOL:
PROTECTING YOUR IDEAS FROM PLAGIARISTS
·
Discuss your research with
colleagues / students OR be secretive
·
Departmental review / research
committees?
·
Carefully document your new ideas
and create evidence they are yours
PROTOCOL:
CONFIDENTIALITY and PRIVACY
·
Measures of protecting personal
data must be described
·
Access to personal research data:
papers and computers must be on a need to know basis
·
Use of anonymized data
PROTOCOL:
INFORMED CONSENT
·
Description of information to be
given to subjects
·
Description of the process of
informed consent
·
Attach documents to be used
PROTOCOL:
DISCLOSURE
·
Disclose all what you want to do
in objectives and methods.
·
Do not add secret ideas later for
fear they may not be approved if presented upfront
·
If you get additional ideas
submit an amendment
PROTOCOL:
FINANCIAL INTEGRITY / COI
·
Mention other sources of funding
·
Conflict of interest regarding
the expected sponsor
·
Paying someone to write part or
all the proposal
PROTOCOL: REGULATORY
AFFAIRS
·
IRB requirements
·
SFDA
requirements
·
GCP requirements
·
Others eg NIH
PUBLICATION: INTERNATIONAL
STANDARDS FOR AUTHORS[1]:
•
The research being reported
should have been conducted in an ethical and responsible manner and should
comply with all relevant legislation.
•
Researchers should present
their results clearly, honestly, and without fabrication, falsification or
inappropriate data manipulation.
•
Researchers should strive
to describe their methods clearly and unambiguously so that their findings can
be confirmed by others.
PUBLICATION: INTERNATIONAL
STANDARDS FOR AUTHORS
•
Researchers should adhere
to publication requirements that submitted work is original, is not
plagiarised, and has not been published elsewhere.
•
Authors should take
collective responsibility for submitted and published work.
•
The authorship of research
publications should accurately reflect individuals’ contributions to the work
and its reporting.
•
Funding sources and
relevant conflicts of interest should be disclosed.
PUBLICATION BIAS (Wikipedia)
·
Bias
to reporting positive findings
·
Bias
to significant results
·
Investigator
refusing to submit results for publication
·
Solution
is registration of the study
·
Selective
reporting
.
PUBLICATION
PROBLEMS (http://publicationethics.org)
·
Author mistakes eg
unauthorized use of questionnaires
· Authorship eg omitted author, ghost author, gift authorship, data monitors as authors
· Lack of consent for publication eg publication of family pedigree
· Copyright breaches eg unauthorized use of a questionnaire
·
Data manipulation/fabrication/falsification
PUBLICATION
PROBLEMS (http://publicationethics.org)
· Dispute over data ownership
· Image manipulation
· Impact factors: manipulation of IF by quoting one another unnecessarily
· Lack of ethical review/approval
· Multiple submissions: When a manuscript (or substantial sections from a manuscript) is submitted to a journal when it is already under consideration by another journal
PUBLICATION
PROBLEMS (http://publicationethics.org)
· Overlapping publications: 2 or more publications based on analysis of the same data set
· Failure to respect participant confidentiality
· Lack of participant consent
· Plagiarism (When somebody presents the work of others (data, words or theories) as if they were his/her own and without proper acknowledgment)
PUBLICATION
PROBLEMS (http://publicationethics.org)
· Failure of protection of subjects (human) or animal subjects
· Redundant publication: publication of the same material or same data in more than one journal without cross referencing
· Selective reporting: When unfavourable or inconvenient end-points (e.g. Outcomes that fail to reach statistical significance or do not favour a particular product or hypothesis) are deliberately omitted from publications reporting research
PUBLICATION
PROBLEMS (http://publicationethics.org)
· Self-plagiarism
· Undeclared coi
· Undeclared financial support for publication
· Unethical research or treatments
NOTES
[1] A position statement developed at the 2nd World
Conference on Research Integrity, Singapore, July 22-24, 2010
[1] DuBois JM1, Anderson EE, Chibnall J. Assessing the need for a research ethics
remediation program. Clin Transl Sci. 2013 Jun;6(3):209-13.
[2] Resnik DB1, Dinse GE. Scientific retractions and corrections related to misconduct findings. Author information. J Med Ethics.
2013 Jan;39(1):46-50.
[3] Vuckovic-Dekic
L1, Gavrilovic D, Kezic I, Bogdanovic G, Brkic S. Science ethics education part II:
changes in attitude toward scientific fraud among medical researchers after a
short course in science ethics. J BUON. 2012 Apr-Jun;17(2):391-5..
[4] Vuckovic-Dekic
L1, Gavrilovic D, Kezic I, Bogdanovic G, Brkic S. Science ethics education part II:
changes in attitude toward scientific fraud among medical researchers after a
short course in science ethics. J BUON. 2012 Apr-Jun;17(2):391-5.
[6] Ghajarzadeh M1, Norouzi-Javidan
A, Hassanpour K, Aramesh K, Emami-Razavi
SH. Attitude toward plagiarism among
Iranian medical faculty members. Acta Med Iran. 2012 Nov;50(11):778-81.
[7] Crockett SD1, Dellon ES, Bright SD, Shaheen NJ. A 25-year analysis of the American College of Gastroenterology research grant program: factors associated with publication and advancement in academics. Am J Gastroenterol. 2009 May;104(5):1097-105.
[8] Krishnan V. Etiquette in scientific publishing. Am J Orthod
Dentofacial Orthop. 2013 Oct;144(4):577-82
[9] Martinson BC1, Crain AL, Anderson MS, De Vries R. Institutions' expectations
for researchers' self-funding, federal grant holding, and private industry
involvement: manifold drivers of self-interest and researcher behavior. Acad Med. 2009 Nov;84(11):1491-9.
[10] Adeleye OA1, Adebamowo CA. Factors associated with research wrongdoing in Nigeria. J Empir Res
Hum Res Ethics. 2012 Dec;7(5):15-24.
[11] López P R [Create or copy... Which is the difference?]. Rev Med Chil. 2009 Jan;137(1):121-6.
[12]
Perfect TJ1, Defeldre AC, Elliman R, Dehon H. No evidence of age-related increases in unconscious plagiarism during free recall. Memory. 2011 Jul;19(5):514-28.
[13]
Kennedy D. Sherlock Holmes and the case of the plagiarised paper. Nurse Educ Today.
2011 Jul;31(5):525-30.
[14]
Sugimori E1, Kitagami S. Plagiarism as an illusional sense of authorship: the effect of predictability on
source attribution of thought. Author information. Acta Psychol (Amst). 2013
May;143(1):35-9. .
[15] Andreescu L. Self-plagiarism in academic publishing: the
anatomy of a misnomer. Sci Eng Ethics. 2013 Sep;19(3):775-97.
[16] Garner HR. Combating unethical
publications with plagiarism detection services. Urol Oncol. 2011
Jan-Feb;29(1):95-9.
[17] Bischoff WR1, Abrego PC. Rapid assessment of assignments using plagiarism
detection software. Nurse Educ. 2011 Nov-Dec;36(6):236-7.