Interventions to promote medical research integrity: a scoping review.

IF 3.1 1区 哲学 Q1 ETHICS
Sihui Liu, Yang Yang, Miqi Li
{"title":"Interventions to promote medical research integrity: a scoping review.","authors":"Sihui Liu, Yang Yang, Miqi Li","doi":"10.1186/s12910-025-01275-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study reviewed the current status of interventions for medical research integrity. The forms and methods of interventions, the timing and duration of interventions, outcome indicators, and evaluation methods and time were systematically reviewed. It provided a reference for the development of intervention programs for medical research integrity. So as to improve the integrity awareness and behavior norms of researchers.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Studies related to medical research integrity and intervention measures were retrieved from databases (PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, EBSCOhost, Sinomed, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wangfang Data, VIP Database). The time limit for retrieval extends from the establishment of the database to June 15,2024. Two researchers independently screened and analyzed the retrieved literature, and the third researcher was asked to decide if there was any doubt.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The study included 17 references from 10 countries. A systematic review of the literature found that the intervention of medical research integrity runs through all stages of school and work. There were various forms of intervention measures, including policy intervention, environmental intervention, educational intervention and software intervention. Educational intervention was the most commonly used intervention for medical research integrity. Most interventions were short-lived and lack long-term follow-up and standardized assessments.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Different interventions have different characteristics and advantages in promoting the integrity of medical research. At present, there is still a lack of uniform standards and long-term evaluation mechanisms for medical research integrity. In the future, various levels and forms of intervention measures should be formulated to improve the integrity of medical research.</p>","PeriodicalId":55348,"journal":{"name":"BMC Medical Ethics","volume":"26 1","pages":"117"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12462000/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Medical Ethics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12910-025-01275-5","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: This study reviewed the current status of interventions for medical research integrity. The forms and methods of interventions, the timing and duration of interventions, outcome indicators, and evaluation methods and time were systematically reviewed. It provided a reference for the development of intervention programs for medical research integrity. So as to improve the integrity awareness and behavior norms of researchers.

Methods: Studies related to medical research integrity and intervention measures were retrieved from databases (PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, EBSCOhost, Sinomed, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wangfang Data, VIP Database). The time limit for retrieval extends from the establishment of the database to June 15,2024. Two researchers independently screened and analyzed the retrieved literature, and the third researcher was asked to decide if there was any doubt.

Results: The study included 17 references from 10 countries. A systematic review of the literature found that the intervention of medical research integrity runs through all stages of school and work. There were various forms of intervention measures, including policy intervention, environmental intervention, educational intervention and software intervention. Educational intervention was the most commonly used intervention for medical research integrity. Most interventions were short-lived and lack long-term follow-up and standardized assessments.

Conclusions: Different interventions have different characteristics and advantages in promoting the integrity of medical research. At present, there is still a lack of uniform standards and long-term evaluation mechanisms for medical research integrity. In the future, various levels and forms of intervention measures should be formulated to improve the integrity of medical research.

Abstract Image

促进医学研究诚信的干预措施:范围审查。
目的:综述医学科研诚信干预措施的现状。系统回顾了干预的形式和方法、干预的时间和持续时间、结果指标、评估方法和时间。为医学科研诚信干预方案的制定提供参考。从而提高科研人员的诚信意识和行为规范。方法:检索PubMed、Web of Science、Scopus、EBSCOhost、Sinomed、中国知网、王方数据、VIP数据库等数据库中与医学研究诚信及干预措施相关的研究。检索时限自数据库建立起至2024年6月15日止。两名研究人员独立筛选和分析检索到的文献,第三名研究人员被要求决定是否有任何疑问。结果:本研究纳入了来自10个国家的17篇文献。系统回顾文献发现,医学研究诚信的干预贯穿于学校和工作的各个阶段。干预措施的形式多种多样,包括政策干预、环境干预、教育干预和软件干预。教育干预是医学研究诚信最常用的干预手段。大多数干预措施是短期的,缺乏长期随访和标准化评估。结论:不同的干预措施在促进医学研究诚信方面具有不同的特点和优势。目前,医学科研诚信还缺乏统一的标准和长效的评价机制。今后应制定多层次、多形式的干预措施,提高医学研究的完整性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
BMC Medical Ethics
BMC Medical Ethics MEDICAL ETHICS-
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
7.40%
发文量
108
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Medical Ethics is an open access journal publishing original peer-reviewed research articles in relation to the ethical aspects of biomedical research and clinical practice, including professional choices and conduct, medical technologies, healthcare systems and health policies.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信