Linda Brubaker, Jesse Nodora, Tamara Bavendam, John Connett, Amy M Claussen, Cora E Lewis, Kyle Rudser, Siobhan Sutcliffe, Jean F Wyman, Janis M Miller
{"title":"A policy toolkit for authorship and dissemination policies may benefit NIH research consortia.","authors":"Linda Brubaker, Jesse Nodora, Tamara Bavendam, John Connett, Amy M Claussen, Cora E Lewis, Kyle Rudser, Siobhan Sutcliffe, Jean F Wyman, Janis M Miller","doi":"10.1080/08989621.2022.2116318","DOIUrl":"10.1080/08989621.2022.2116318","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Authorship and dissemination policies vary across NIH research consortia. We aimed to describe elements of real-life policies in use by eligible U01 clinical research consortia. Principal investigators of eligible, active U01 clinical research projects identified in the NIH Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tools database shared relevant policies. The characteristics of key policy elements, determined a priori, were reviewed and quantified, when appropriate. Twenty one of 81 research projects met search criteria and provided policies. K elements (e.g., in quotations): \"manuscript proposals reviewed and approved by committee\" (90%); \"guidelines for acknowledgements\" (86%); \"writing team formation\" (71%); \"process for final manuscript review and approval\" (71%), \"responsibilities for lead author\" (67%), \"guidelines for other types of publications\" (67%); \"draft manuscript review and approval\" (62%); \"recommendation for number of members per consortium site\" (57%); and \"requirement to identify individual contributions in the manuscript\" (19%). Authorship/dissemination policies for large team science research projects are highly variable. Creation of an NIH policies repository and accompanying toolkit with model language and recommended key elements could improve comprehensiveness, ethical integrity, and efficiency in team science work while reducing burden and cost on newly funded consortia and directing time and resources to scientific endeavors.</p>","PeriodicalId":50927,"journal":{"name":"Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9975116/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"9502988","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Noor Lide Abu Kassim, Siti Khairunnisa Mohd Bakri, Fariha Nusrat, Elnaz Salim, Muhammad Manjurul Karim, Mohammad Tariqur Rahman
{"title":"Time-based changes in authorship trend in research-intensive universities in Malaysia.","authors":"Noor Lide Abu Kassim, Siti Khairunnisa Mohd Bakri, Fariha Nusrat, Elnaz Salim, Muhammad Manjurul Karim, Mohammad Tariqur Rahman","doi":"10.1080/08989621.2022.2094256","DOIUrl":"10.1080/08989621.2022.2094256","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Considering the fact that publications serve as an important criterion to evaluate the scientific accomplishments of an individual within respective fields in academia, there has been an increasing trend to publish scientific articles whereby multiple authors are defined as primary, co-, or corresponding authors according to the roles performed. This article analyzes the authorship pattern in 4,561 papers (including 60 single-authored papers) from 1990 till 2020 of 94 academics who hold a position as professors and are affiliated with the Faculty of Medicine at three different research universities in Malaysia. Only 708 papers (15.5% of 4,561 papers) were authored by less than three authors. In 3,080 papers (67.5% of 4,561 papers), those academics appeared as coauthors. Using different years as cutoff periods, it was observed that the appearance as coauthor in the papers had steeply risen around the years: 2006, 2007, 2008 and onwards. The increased number of authors in the multi-author papers and the appearance of the selected academics as coauthors reflect the extent of boosting of collaborative research in that period which corresponds to the adoption of the \"publish or perish policy\" by the Ministry of Higher Education in Malaysia.</p>","PeriodicalId":50927,"journal":{"name":"Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"40403834","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Assessment of the knowledge and attitudes of the Iranian medical faculty toward plagiarism.","authors":"Saleheh Tajalli, Roqayeh Aliyari, Ashghali Farahani Mansoureh, Fatemeh Heydari, Sanaz Motefakker, Azam Shirinabadi Farahani","doi":"10.1080/08989621.2022.2083961","DOIUrl":"10.1080/08989621.2022.2083961","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study is among the few investigations that assesses knowledge and attitudes of faculty members of medical sciences universities regarding plagiarism. This investigation focused on the relationship between personal factors and knowledge and attitudes toward plagiarism among Iranian faculty members of medical sciences affiliated with the Ministry of Health. This descriptive cross-sectional study was performed on 247 participants using demographic questionnaires that collected data on attitudes toward plagiarism and knowledge of plagiarism. The questionnaires were uploaded on Porsline. The subjects were provided with the purpose of the study, informed consent, and the link to the questionnaire through WhatsApp. The mean scores of knowledge variables and different domains of attitude were calculated, and then, the obtained averages were compared in terms of age, gender, and participation in ethics workshop using univariate tests. Finally, the MANCOVA was used considering five dimensions of the questionnaire to assess attitude, as multiple response variables, and independent variables, including gender and participation in the ethics workshop and control of knowledge and age. The mean age of the subjects in this study was 38.9 ± 8.4. 79.4% of the participants were women. Overall, 79.8% of people participated in ethics workshops, of whom 78% were women, and 86.5% were men. The mean score of knowledge in men and women was 1.35 ± 0.19 and 1.56. ± 0.24, respectively, which was higher in women than men (PV <0.001). The mean score of total attitudes was 3.19 ± 0.46. There was a high level of knowledge of plagiarism and positive attitudes toward plagiarism avoidance or prevention among participants in this study, which may spread to students, and help to promote integrity in the educational and clinical environment in Iran.</p>","PeriodicalId":50927,"journal":{"name":"Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47610165","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Procrastination and inconsistency: Expressions of concern for publications with compromised integrity.","authors":"Andrew Grey, Alison Avenell, Mark J Bolland","doi":"10.1080/08989621.2022.2112572","DOIUrl":"10.1080/08989621.2022.2112572","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Expressions of concern (EoC) can reduce the adverse effects of unreliable publications by alerting readers to concerns about publication integrity while assessment is undertaken. We investigated the use of EoC for 463 publications by two research groups for which we notified concerns about publication integrity to 142 journals and 44 publishers between March 2013 and February 2020. By December 2021, 95 papers had had an EoC, and 83 were retracted without an EoC. Median times from notification of concerns to EoC (10.4mo) or retraction without EoC (13.1mo) were similar. Among the 95 EoCs, 29 (30.5%) were followed by retraction after a median of 5.4mo, none was lifted, and 66 (69.5%) remained in place after a median of 18.1mo. Publishers with >10 notified publications issued EoCs for 0-81.8% of papers: for several publishers the proportions of notified papers for which EoCs were issued varied considerably between the 2 research groups. EoCs were issued for >30% of notified publications of randomized clinical trials and letters to the editor, and <20% of other types of research. These results demonstrate inconsistent application of EoCs between and within publishers, and prolonged times to issue and resolve EoCs.</p>","PeriodicalId":50927,"journal":{"name":"Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"9344381","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Elisabeth Hildt, Kelly Laas, Christine Z Miller, Stephanie Taylor
{"title":"Student views on the culture of STEM research laboratories: Results from an interview study.","authors":"Elisabeth Hildt, Kelly Laas, Christine Z Miller, Stephanie Taylor","doi":"10.1080/08989621.2022.2109018","DOIUrl":"10.1080/08989621.2022.2109018","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In this article, we present the results of 30 ethnographic interviews in which we asked STEM graduate and undergraduate students at a Midwest university in the United States about topics related to the culture of their research group, how group members communicate and interact, and their experience with ethical issues that arise within the laboratory. Here we focus on the culture of research laboratories and describe the key categories that emerged through analysis, including communication, community structure, governance, and collaboration that influence and shape lab culture. We also consider the critical role of the principal investigator (PI) to influence conditions in the lab that facilitate or inhibit lab culture and the subsequent effects on student feelings and behaviors, interpersonal communication, collaboration, work output, and ethics. Our findings suggest that the quality of research and the wellbeing of the lab members depend not only on purely scientific factors and routine research practices but are also dependent on the culture of the lab as it manifests in interpersonal relationships. The interviews reveal the critical role students ascribe to the PI in shaping the lab culture. Based on this study, we suggest how ethical lab cultures might be encouraged.</p>","PeriodicalId":50927,"journal":{"name":"Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"40591928","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Adaptive Machine Learning in Medicine: Not Human Subjects Research, Not Research at All.","authors":"Haavi Morreim","doi":"10.1080/15265161.2024.2388761","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15265161.2024.2388761","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":50962,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Bioethics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":17.0,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142300190","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Annals of SciencePub Date : 2024-10-01Epub Date: 2023-08-02DOI: 10.1080/00033790.2023.2235364
Plamena Panayotova
{"title":"Inventing the language of <i>Things</i>: the emergence of scientific reporting in seventeenth-century England.","authors":"Plamena Panayotova","doi":"10.1080/00033790.2023.2235364","DOIUrl":"10.1080/00033790.2023.2235364","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>As a style of writing and a form of communication, the modern scientific report enables the creation, sharing and continuous updating of natural knowledge in such a manner that the idiosyncrasies of ordinary language are reduced to a minimum. This article examines how the standards for scientific reporting were 'born' in the seventeenth century and their legacy. The first part of the article reviews the existing literature on this topic. The second part outlines the key features of the scientific report and the common standards for scientific reporting. The third part presents detailed historical evidence to trace the emergence of these standards in seventeenth-century England. The final part discusses why the scientific report means so much for the progress of science, for understanding the history of science and science popularization, and even for the development of academia more generally.</p>","PeriodicalId":8086,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"9923542","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Annals of SciencePub Date : 2024-10-01Epub Date: 2023-07-05DOI: 10.1080/00033790.2023.2229325
Gabriele Vanin
{"title":"On Simon Mayr's alleged discovery of Jupiter's satellites.","authors":"Gabriele Vanin","doi":"10.1080/00033790.2023.2229325","DOIUrl":"10.1080/00033790.2023.2229325","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In 1614, the German astronomer Simon Mayr published his claim about the discovery of Jupiter's satellites. In his treatise <i>Mundus Jovialis</i>, Mayr made his assertion in a convoluted but unequivocal manner, earning resentment from Galileo Galilei, who published his harsh protest in 1623 in <i>Il Saggiatore</i>. Though Galileo's objections were fallacious in some respects, and though numerous scholars took to the field to prove Mayr's claim, none ever really succeeded, and the historical evidence remains to Mayr's detriment. On the basis of such historical evidence, including comparisons between <i>Mundus Jovialis</i> and Mayr's earlier works, Mayr's independent discovery of the satellites can be ruled out. Indeed, it is very likely that he never observed them before 30 December 1610, nearly a year after Galileo. The lack of a corpus of Mayr's observations and the inaccuracy of his tables are also puzzling.</p>","PeriodicalId":8086,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"9807500","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Machine Learning-Generated Clinical Data as Collateral Research: A Global Neuroethical Analysis.","authors":"Michael O S Afolabi, Stephen Sodeke","doi":"10.1080/15265161.2024.2388724","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15265161.2024.2388724","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":50962,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Bioethics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":17.0,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142300192","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Annals of SciencePub Date : 2024-10-01Epub Date: 2024-04-29DOI: 10.1080/00033790.2024.2346379
{"title":"Correction.","authors":"","doi":"10.1080/00033790.2024.2346379","DOIUrl":"10.1080/00033790.2024.2346379","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":8086,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140861784","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}