1. Scientific Integrity An overview for Medical Students, Interns and Faculty Researchers At Duke University LSIS 5245 Shamella Cromartie, North Carolina Central University
2. Who's Talking About Scientific Integrity? The President, the federal government, the FDA, the USDA, concerned scientists and researchers, political parties and agencies and even the general public, all over the world, are concerned with scientific integrity.
3. And what are they saying? The scientific integrity conversation includes issues of public health, global health, public safety, misleading research and its subsequent complications, endangerment and the threat it all poses.
4. Duke UniversityThe Duke University School of Medicine strives to transform medicine and health, locally and globally, through innovative scientific research and rapid translation of breakthrough discoveries. “One of higher education's essential responsibilities is ensuring the integrity of scientific research.” –Melissa Anderson, 2008
5. Key Concepts in Scientific Integrity Ethical conduct in science assures the reliability of research results and the safety of research subjects. Ethics in science include: a) standards of methods and process that address research design, procedures, data analysis, interpretation, and reporting; and b) standards of topics and findings that address the use of human and animal subjects in research. Replication, collaboration, and peer review all help to minimize ethical breaches, and identify them when they do occur.
6. What is the difference? Scientific Integrity: Because of the complexity, variability, and nature of scientific inquiry, the concept of integrity in research can be elusive, and its value cannot be easily assessed or measured. Scientific Misconduct is the violation of the standard codes of scholarly conduct and ethical behavior in professional scientific research. BUT
7. The measure of a man's character is what he would do if he knew he never would be found out.-Thomas Babington Macaulay, 1800 - 1859
8. What reasons lead to scientific misconduct? Pressure to Produce Cognitive Deficiency Inappropriate Responsibility Difficult Job/Tasks Professional Conflicts Stress/Pressure in General Supervisor Expectations Insufficient Supervision/Mentoring Non-collegial Work Environment Lack of Support System Substandard Lab Procedures Overworked Insufficient Time Poor Communication & Coordination
9. More reasons for scientific misconduct……… Competition for Position Insecure Position Pressure on Self Over-Committed Desire to Succeed/Please Personal Insecurities Fear Carelessness Lack of Control Impatient Jumping the Gun Laziness Apathy/Dislike/Desire to Leave Personal Problems Psychological Problems
10. What Classifies as Scientific Misconduct? Specific acts of scientific misconduct include, but are not limited to, the following: Falsification or Misrepresentation of Data, which includes: reporting experiments, measurements, or statistical analyses never performed manipulating or altering data or other manifestations of research to achieve a desired result falsifying or misrepresenting background information, including biographical data, citation of publications, or status of manuscripts selective reporting, including the deliberate suppression of conflicting or unwanted data Photo Manipulation From St. John’s University Preamble and Definition of Scientific Misconduct
11. Misconduct continued……. PlagiarismThe misrepresentation of the words or ideas of another as one's own. More subtle practices include misleading or inadequate reference citation and duplicate publication of identical data without adequate reference. Abuse of ConfidentialityThe misuse of confidential information or the failure to maintain the confidentiality of such information. This includes the use of ideas and preliminary data gained from (1) access to privileged information through the opportunity for editorial review of manuscripts submitted to journals; and (2) peer review of proposals considered for funding by agency panels or internal committees. Other Practiceswhich seriously deviate from those that are commonly accepted within the scientific community for proposing, conducting, or reporting research, include, but are not limited to, the following: Aiding or facilitating acts of academic dishonesty by others. Violating pertinent federal or University regulations and ethical codes such as those involving the protection and welfare of human subjects and laboratory animals. From St. John’s University Preamble and Definition of Scientific Misconduct
12. Cases of Scientific Misconduct At the end of 2005, the scientific community was shocked by one of the greatest cases of misconduct in the history of science. Two breakthrough articles about stem cell technology from a Korean laboratory headed by Woo-Suk Hwang, published in Science, appeared to be almost completely fabricated and were therefore retracted. On May 12, 2006, Hwang was indicted on charges of fraud, embezzlement and breach of the country's bioethics law, without physical detention. Prosecutors also brought fraud charges against the three stem cell researchers. He embezzled 2.8 billion won ($3 million) out of some 40 billion won in research funds for personal purposes and the illegal purchase of ova used in his experiments. Scott S. Reuben (born 1958) of East Longmeadow, Massachusetts was Professor of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine at Baystate Medical Center in Springfield, Massachusetts before being sentenced to prison for health care fraud. Reuben was considered a prolific and influential researcher in pain management, and his purported findings altered the way millions of patients are treated for pain during and after orthopedic surgeries.[1] Reuben has now admitted that he never conducted any of the clinical trials on which his conclusions were based "in what may be considered the longest-running and widest-ranging cases of academic fraud."[2]Scientific American has called Reuben the medical equivalent of Bernie Madoff, the former NASDAQ chairman who was convicted of orchestrating a $65-billion fraud.[1] Source: Wikipedia
20. Maintain Scientific Integrity Keep the best records possible in all scientific experimentation Continuously access the validity of your results through peer review. NO Shortcuts Validate your results through replication Consult trusted advisors
21. Remember! Honest error or differences of opinion are not considered research misconduct. Fact: Many allegations of plagiarism involve disputes among former collaborators who participated jointly in the development or conduct of a research project, but who subsequently went their separate ways and made independent use of the jointly developed concepts, methods, descriptive language, or other product of the joint effort. The ownership of the intellectual property in many such situations is seldom clear, and the collaborative history among the scientists often supports a presumption of implied consent to use the products of the collaboration by any of the former collaborators. ---Office of Research Integrity
22. Research Misconduct is Not a Joke! Do not commit irreversible damage to your career! Thinking about research misconduct now, will help you avoid it in the future.
23. References Anderson, Melissa.(2008), “Scientific Integrity: Maintaining the Legitimacy of the Research Enterprise”. Proceedings of the 4th International Barcelona Conference onHigher Education, Vol. 1. Ethics and relevance of scientific knowledge: what knowledge for what society?. Barcelona: GUNI. Available athttp://www.gunirmies.net Office of Research Integrity. http://ori.hhs.gov/ St. John’s University Office of Grants and Sponsored Research. Preamble and Definition of Scientific Misconduct. http://www.stjohns.edu/academics/centers/grants/policy/misconduct/i_preamble2.stj Wikipedia. 2011.
