search this site.

181202P - ETHICO-LEGAL ISSUES IN RESEARCH GRANTS

Copyright 1995-2023 © by Prof Omar Hasan Kasule - Admin
Category:
Print Friendly and PDFPrint Friendly

Presentation at a Course on Bioethics Alfaisal University, Riyadh held on 2 December 2018 by Professor Omar Hasan Kasule Sr. MB ChB (MUK). MPH (Harvard), DrPH (Harvard) Chairman of the Ethics Committee King Fahad Medical City.


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 
  • A short course can change attitude to fraud[3]
  • Researchers recognize fraud but do not blow the whistle[4,5]
  • Poor attitude to plagiarism in Iran[6] 


INTRODUCTION TO RESEARCH MAL-PRACTICE: CAUSES

  • Research grants are an avenue for academic promotion and professional growth[7]
  • The 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 wrongdoing in Nigeria due to knowledge gaps in ethics and the pressure to publish[10]


INVESTIGATORS AND AUTHORSHIP

  • Principal investigator / co-investigators or sub-investigator must be mentioned.
  • All names mentioned must have substantial recorded contributions.
  • 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?


ORIGINALITY 

  • Thorough literature review to make sure this investigation is original. 
  • Check clearinghouses such as Cochrane and www.clinicaltrials.org 
  • Cite and acknowledge all information used in the proposal.
  • Why is repeat research is already done? Local experience / training/scientific validation.
  • Writing proposals from boilerplates. 


PLAGIARISM: DEFINITION 

  • Create or copy? Is it possible to create from nothing?[11]
  • Plagiarism is a complex phenomenon 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 classroom? 
  • What if it is your original idea but someone already thought of it?
  • Self-plagiarism [15]? 


PLAGIARISM: DETECTION AND AVOIDANCE

  • Plagiarism detection services[16]
  • If in doubt run plagiarism software.
  • Plagiarism detection can be quick[17] or can be sophisticated[18]. Even Google can help.
  • If you are a research administrator should you write proposals? 


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. 


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. 


INFORMED CONSENT 

  • Description of information to be given to subjects
  • Description of the process of informed consent
  • Attach documents to be used 


DISCLOSURE

  • Disclose all that 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. 


FINANCIAL INTEGRITY / COI

  • Mention other sources of funding.
  • Conflict of interest regarding the expected sponsor.
  • Paying someone to write part or all the proposal. 


REGULATORY AFFAIRS

  • IRB requirements 
  • SFDA requirements
  • GCP requirements
  • Others e.g. NIH  


REFERENCE:

  1. DuBois JM, Anderson EE, Chibnall J.Assessing the need for a research ethics remediation program.Clin Transl Sci. 2013 Jun;6(3):209-13. 
  2. Resnik DB, Dinse GE. Scientific retractions and corrections related to misconduct findings.Author information. J Med Ethics. 2013 Jan;39(1):46-50.
  3. Vuckovic-Dekic L, 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 L, 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. 
  5. Vuckovic-Dekic L, Gavrilovic D, Kezic I, Bogdanovic G, Brkic S. Science ethics education part I. Perception and attitude toward scientific fraud among medical researchers. J BUON. 2011 Oct-Dec;16(4):771-7. 
  6. Ghajarzadeh M, 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 SD, 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 OrthodDentofacialOrthop. 2013 Oct;144(4):577-82. 
  9. Martinson BC, 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 OA, 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 TJ, 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 E, 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 WR, Abrego PC. Rapid assessment of assignments using plagiarism detection software. Nurse Educ. 2011 Nov- Dec;36(6):236-7.
  18. Chow TW, Rahman MK. Multilayer SOM with tree-structured data for efficient document retrieval and plagiarism detection.IEEE Trans Neural Netw. 2009 Sep;20(9):1385-402.