Corporations, high-stakes biomedical research, and research misconduct: yes they can (and sometimes do).

IF 2.5 2区 哲学 Q1 ETHICS
Journal of Law and the Biosciences Pub Date : 2021-07-01 eCollection Date: 2021-01-01 DOI:10.1093/jlb/lsab014
E H Morreim
{"title":"Corporations, high-stakes biomedical research, and research misconduct: yes they can (and sometimes do).","authors":"E H Morreim","doi":"10.1093/jlb/lsab014","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Science has long been vulnerable to research misconduct (RM). Biomedical sciences, with vast financial stakes, carry heightened temptations. However, RM is standardly seen as an undertaking of individual scientists, not as something that could be committed by an organization such as a corporation or university. Rather, organizations are generally regarded merely as supervisors to encourage scientific integrity and investigate suspected RM. Indeed, federal regulations expressly embrace this perspective, and the federal Office of Research Integrity has never deemed an organization guilty of committing RM. This article aims to rewrite this corner of research integrity: organizations can directly commit RM and should be held accountable as such. Although the conclusions apply to organizations such as universities and government agencies, the focus here is on corporations in the biomedical sciences. After defining 'research misconduct' in Part II, Part III describes corporate-level RM and distinguishes it from individuals' misconduct. Part IV provides five case studies exemplifying corporate RM, while Part V discusses implications, describes ways in which federal regulations could already encompass organization-level RM, and identifies some needed legal and regulatory adjustments.</p>","PeriodicalId":56266,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Law and the Biosciences","volume":"8 1","pages":"lsab014"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/f2/b1/lsab014.PMC8247552.pdf","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Law and the Biosciences","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jlb/lsab014","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

Science has long been vulnerable to research misconduct (RM). Biomedical sciences, with vast financial stakes, carry heightened temptations. However, RM is standardly seen as an undertaking of individual scientists, not as something that could be committed by an organization such as a corporation or university. Rather, organizations are generally regarded merely as supervisors to encourage scientific integrity and investigate suspected RM. Indeed, federal regulations expressly embrace this perspective, and the federal Office of Research Integrity has never deemed an organization guilty of committing RM. This article aims to rewrite this corner of research integrity: organizations can directly commit RM and should be held accountable as such. Although the conclusions apply to organizations such as universities and government agencies, the focus here is on corporations in the biomedical sciences. After defining 'research misconduct' in Part II, Part III describes corporate-level RM and distinguishes it from individuals' misconduct. Part IV provides five case studies exemplifying corporate RM, while Part V discusses implications, describes ways in which federal regulations could already encompass organization-level RM, and identifies some needed legal and regulatory adjustments.

公司、高风险的生物医学研究和研究不端行为:是的,它们可以(有时也会)。
长期以来,科学一直容易受到研究不端行为(RM)的影响。生物医学科学有着巨大的经济利益,因此有着更高的诱惑。然而,RM通常被视为科学家个人的事业,而不是公司或大学等组织可以承担的事情。相反,组织通常被视为仅仅是鼓励科学诚信和调查可疑RM的监督者。事实上,联邦法规明确支持这一观点,联邦研究诚信办公室从未认为一个组织犯有RM罪。本文旨在改写研究完整性的这一角落:组织可以直接提交RM,并且应该对此负责。虽然这些结论适用于大学和政府机构等组织,但这里的重点是生物医学科学领域的公司。在第二部分定义了“研究不当行为”之后,第三部分描述了公司层面的RM,并将其与个人的不当行为区分开来。第四部分提供了五个案例研究,作为公司RM的例证,而第五部分讨论了影响,描述了联邦法规已经包含组织级RM的方式,并确定了一些需要的法律和法规调整。
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
Journal of Law and the Biosciences
Journal of Law and the Biosciences Medicine-Medicine (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
7.40
自引率
5.90%
发文量
35
审稿时长
13 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Law and the Biosciences (JLB) is the first fully Open Access peer-reviewed legal journal focused on the advances at the intersection of law and the biosciences. A co-venture between Duke University, Harvard University Law School, and Stanford University, and published by Oxford University Press, this open access, online, and interdisciplinary academic journal publishes cutting-edge scholarship in this important new field. The Journal contains original and response articles, essays, and commentaries on a wide range of topics, including bioethics, neuroethics, genetics, reproductive technologies, stem cells, enhancement, patent law, and food and drug regulation. JLB is published as one volume with three issues per year with new articles posted online on an ongoing basis.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信