Read by QxMD icon Read

Peer-review fraud

Dieter Böning
In modern societies there is strong belief in scientific progress, but, unfortunately, a parallel partial regress occurs because of often avoidable mistakes. Mistakes are mainly forgetting, erroneous theories, errors in experiments and manuscripts, prejudice, selected publication of "positive" results, and fraud. An example of forgetting is that methods introduced decades ago are used without knowing the underlying theories: Basic articles are no longer read or cited. This omission may cause incorrect interpretation of results...
November 2016: International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance
Douglas S Katz, James B Gardner, Jason C Hoffmann, Michael N Patlas, Puneet Bhargava, Mariam Moshiri, Erick M Remer, Elaine S Gould, Stacy Smith
OBJECTIVE: Although some research and publication practices are clearly unethical, including fraud and plagiarism, other areas of research and publication, such as informed consent and conflicts of interest, fall into grayer areas. CONCLUSION: The purposes of this article are, therefore, to review a variety of relevant ethical issues in radiology-related journalism, peer review, and research; to review the radiology literature to date that has addressed these issues; and to present position statements and potential solutions to these problems...
August 17, 2016: AJR. American Journal of Roentgenology
M B Nielsen, K Seitz
The impact factor (IF) for 2015 was recently released and this could be the time to once again reflect on its use as a metric of a journal. Problems and concerns regarding the IF have been addressed extensively elsewhere 1 2. The principle of the IF for a given year is that it represents the average number of citations of articles published in the journal in the two previous years.While authors frequently cite the IF as a determining factor for submission, the IF does not predict how many times individual articles will be cited...
August 2016: Ultraschall in der Medizin
A K Das
Reviewers play a vital role in ensuring quality control of scientific manuscripts published in any journal. The traditional double blind peer review, although a time-tested method, has come under increasing criticism in the face of emerging trends in the review process with the primary concern being the delays in completion of the review process. Other issues are the inability to detect errors/fraud, lack of transparency, lack of reliability, potential for bias, potential for unethical practices, lack of objectivity, inconsistencies amongst reviewers, lack of recognition and motivation of reviewers...
April 2016: Medical Journal, Armed Forces India
S Giralt, R Korngold, H M Lazarus
Peer review is believed to be important in maintaining the quality and integrity of research in academic endeavors. Recently, the value of the current peer review process, which is more than 100 years old has come into question. In the field of hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT), peer review was unable to prevent the publication of the largest and most notorious scientific fraud in our field. In order to assess how the HCT community views and how engaged it is with the peer review process, the American Society of Blood and Marrow Transplantation conducted a survey of all of its members in 2014...
September 2016: Bone Marrow Transplantation
Shamima Rahman, Matthias R Baumgartner, Eva Morava, Marc Patterson, Verena Peters, Johannes Zschocke
No abstract text is available yet for this article.
January 2016: Journal of Inherited Metabolic Disease
Charlotte J Haug
In August 2015, the publisher Springer retracted 64 articles from 10 different subscription journals "after editorial checks spotted fake email addresses, and subsequent internal investigations uncovered fabricated peer review reports," according to a statement on their website. The retractions..
December 17, 2015: New England Journal of Medicine
P J Benson
'Medical science can only flourish in a free society and dies under totalitarian repression.' (1) Peer review post-publication is relatively easy to define: when the world decides the importance of publication. Peer review pre-publication is what the scientific community frequently means when using the term 'peer review'. But what it is it? Few will agree on an exact definition; generally speaking, it refers to an independent, third party scrutiny of a manuscript by scientific experts (called peers) who advise on its suitability for publication...
October 2015: Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England
Jayakumar Avula, Haritha Avula
There has been a phenomenal increase in the number of research papers with multiple authors. Increasing academic pressures and halo around individuals with prolific publications have made many aspirants to claim authorship. Increasing number of authors has brought its own issues of author credits, disputes, rivalry, and a degree of unwelcome scramble for credit sharing. Many unresolved issues about authorship and various guidelines and admonitions are more often infringed than adhered to. The position of the first and last author seem to be well recognized in medical and dental journals, but the fate of middle authors is left to guessing and often of inconsequential importance...
May 2015: Journal of Indian Society of Periodontology
Kevin Mullane, S J Enna, Jacques Piette, Michael Williams
Recent reports have highlighted studies in biomedical research that cannot be reproduced, tending to undermine the credibility, relevance and sustainability of the research process. To address this issue, a number of factors can be monitored to improve the overall probability of reproducibility. These include: (i) shortcomings in experimental design and execution that involve hypothesis conceptualization, statistical analysis, and data reporting; (ii) investigator bias and error; (iii) validation of reagents including cells and antibodies; and (iv) fraud...
October 1, 2015: Biochemical Pharmacology
Wolfgang Stroebe, Tom Postmes, Russell Spears
The recent Stapel fraud case came as a shattering blow to the scientific community of psychologists and damaged both their image in the media and their collective self-esteem. The field responded with suggestions of how fraud could be prevented. However, the Stapel fraud is only one among many cases. Before basing recommendations on one case, it would be informative to study other cases to assess how these frauds were discovered. The authors analyze a convenience sample of fraud cases to see whether (social) psychology is more susceptible to fraud than other disciplines...
November 2012: Perspectives on Psychological Science: a Journal of the Association for Psychological Science
David W Galbraith
Publication forms the core structure supporting the development and transmission of scientific knowledge. For this reason, it is essential that the highest standards of quality control be maintained, in particular to ensure that the information being transmitted allows reproducible replication of the described experiments, and that the interpretation of the results is sound. Quality control has traditionally involved editorial decisions based on anonymous pre-publication peer review. Post-publication review of individual articles took the lesser role since it did not feed directly back to the original literature...
2015: Frontiers in Genetics
Richard Walker, Pascal Rocha da Silva
"Classical peer review" has been subject to intense criticism for slowing down the publication process, bias against specific categories of paper and author, unreliability, inability to detect errors and fraud, unethical practices, and the lack of recognition for unpaid reviewers. This paper surveys innovative forms of peer review that attempt to address these issues. Based on an initial literature review, we construct a sample of 82 channels of scientific communication covering all forms of review identified by the survey, and analyze the review mechanisms used by each channel...
2015: Frontiers in Neuroscience
Takashi Asai
Quality of Japanese research has risen and studies are now routinely published in international journals. Nevertheless, the number of studies reported by Japanese anesthesiologists is rapidly decreasing. Greater clinical workload, increased rules for carrying out clinical research and publication, and reported incidents of scientific fraud might have been the cause. In this issue, 6 authors from Japanese Society of Anesthesiologists and editors of anesthesia journals analyze the current state of research activity by Japanese anesthesiologists and indicate some practical solutions to increase research activity...
January 2015: Masui. the Japanese Journal of Anesthesiology
I Freckelton
The incidence of research fraud has reached troubling levels. Too often peer review has failed to prevent it. The harm caused by such conduct extends to patients, co-authors, supervisors, employing institutions, funders, journals, publishers, and importantly the area and direction of the research itself and its potential influence are tarnished. A number of commentators have raised the option of criminal charges being preferred against those responsible for such fraud. This has occurred in the United States, in particular, but also in the United Kingdom, Korea and Australia in high-profile cases...
December 2014: Journal of Law and Medicine
Margaret H Kearney
No abstract text is available yet for this article.
February 2015: Research in Nursing & Health
H Twaij, S Oussedik, P Hoffmeyer
The maintenance of quality and integrity in clinical and basic science research depends upon peer review. This process has stood the test of time and has evolved to meet increasing work loads, and ways of detecting fraud in the scientific community. However, in the 21st century, the emphasis on evidence-based medicine and good science has placed pressure on the ways in which the peer review system is used by most journals. This paper reviews the peer review system and the problems it faces in the digital age, and proposes possible solutions...
April 2014: Bone & Joint Journal
Ni Dai, Dingyao Xu, Xiyao Zhong, Li Li, Qibo Ling, Zhaode Bu
There is urgent need for medical journals to optimize their publishing processes and strategies to satisfy the huge need for medical scientists to publish their articles, and then obtain better prestige and impact in scientific and research community. These strategies include optimizing the process of peer-review, utilizing open-access publishing models actively, finding ways of saving costs and getting revenue, smartly dealing with research fraud or misconduct, maintaining sound relationship with pharmaceutical companies, and managing to provide relevant and useful information for clinical practitioners and researchers...
February 2014: Chinese Journal of Cancer Research, Chung-kuo Yen Cheng Yen Chiu
Matthew D Zimmerman, Marek Grabowski, Marcin J Domagalski, Elizabeth M Maclean, Maksymilian Chruszcz, Wladek Minor
Modern high-throughput structural biology laboratories produce vast amounts of raw experimental data. The traditional method of data reduction is very simple-results are summarized in peer-reviewed publications, which are hopefully published in high-impact journals. By their nature, publications include only the most important results derived from experiments that may have been performed over the course of many years. The main content of the published paper is a concise compilation of these data, an interpretation of the experimental results, and a comparison of these results with those obtained by other scientists...
2014: Methods in Molecular Biology
Doncho Donev
INTRODUCTION AND AIM: To present the basic principles and standards of scientific communication and writing a paper, to indicate the importance of honesty and ethical approach to research and publication of results in scientific journals, as well as the need for continuing education in the principles and ethics in science and publication in biomedicine. METHODS: An analysis of relevant materials and documents, sources from the internet and published literature and personal experience and observations of the author...
December 2013: Acta Informatica Medica: AIM
Fetch more papers »
Fetching more papers... Fetching...
Read by QxMD. Sign in or create an account to discover new knowledge that matter to you.
Remove bar
Read by QxMD icon Read

Search Tips

Use Boolean operators: AND/OR

diabetic AND foot
diabetes OR diabetic

Exclude a word using the 'minus' sign

Virchow -triad

Use Parentheses

water AND (cup OR glass)

Add an asterisk (*) at end of a word to include word stems

Neuro* will search for Neurology, Neuroscientist, Neurological, and so on

Use quotes to search for an exact phrase

"primary prevention of cancer"
(heart or cardiac or cardio*) AND arrest -"American Heart Association"