Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance最新文献

Citation bias, diversity, and ethics. 引文偏见、多样性和道德规范。

IF 3.4 1区哲学

Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance Pub Date : 2024-12-01 Epub Date: 2022-08-18 DOI: 10.1080/08989621.2022.2111257

Keisha S Ray, Perry Zurn, Jordan D Dworkin, Dani S Bassett, David B Resnik

{"title":"Citation bias, diversity, and ethics.","authors":"Keisha S Ray, Perry Zurn, Jordan D Dworkin, Dani S Bassett, David B Resnik","doi":"10.1080/08989621.2022.2111257","DOIUrl":"10.1080/08989621.2022.2111257","url":null,"abstract":"How often a researcher is cited usually plays a decisive role in that person's career advancement, because academic institutions often use citation metrics, either explicitly or implicitly, to estimate research impact and productivity. Research has shown, however, that citation patterns and practices are affected by various biases, including the prestige of the authors being cited and their gender, race, and nationality, whether self-attested or perceived. Some commentators have proposed that researchers can address biases related to social identity or position by including a Citation Diversity Statement in a manuscript submitted for publication. A Citation Diversity Statement is a paragraph placed before the reference section of a manuscript in which the authors address the diversity and equitability of their references in terms of gender, race, ethnicity, or other factors and affirm a commitment to promoting equity and diversity in sources and references. The present commentary considers arguments in favor of Citation Diversity Statements, and some practical and ethical issues that these statements raise.","PeriodicalId":50927,"journal":{"name":"Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance","volume":" ","pages":"158-172"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9938084/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"10799570","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}

引用次数: 0

A randomized trial alerting authors, with or without coauthors or editors, that research they cited in systematic reviews and guidelines has been retracted. 一项随机试验，提醒作者（无论有无共同作者或编辑）他们在系统综述和指南中引用的研究已被撤回。

IF 3.4 1区哲学

Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance Pub Date : 2024-12-01 Epub Date: 2022-06-26 DOI: 10.1080/08989621.2022.2082290

Alison Avenell, Mark J Bolland, Greg D Gamble, Andrew Grey

{"title":"A randomized trial alerting authors, with or without coauthors or editors, that research they cited in systematic reviews and guidelines has been retracted.","authors":"Alison Avenell, Mark J Bolland, Greg D Gamble, Andrew Grey","doi":"10.1080/08989621.2022.2082290","DOIUrl":"10.1080/08989621.2022.2082290","url":null,"abstract":"Retracted clinical trials may be influential in citing systematic reviews and clinical guidelines. We assessed the influence of 27 retracted trials on systematic reviews and clinical guidelines (citing publications), then alerted authors to these retractions. Citing publications were randomized to up to three e-mails to contact author with/without up to two coauthors, with/without the editor. After one year we assessed corrective action. We included 88 citing publications; 51% (45/88) had findings likely to change if retracted trials were removed, 87% (39/45) likely substantially. 51% (44/86) of contacted citing publications replied. Including three authors rather than the contact author alone was more likely to elicit a reply (P = 0.03). Including the editor did not increase replies (P = 0.66). Whether findings were judged likely to change, and size of the likely change, had no effect on response rate or action taken. One year after e-mails were sent only nine publications had published notifications. E-Mail alerts to authors and editors are inadequate to correct the impact of retracted publications in citing systematic reviews and guidelines. Changes to bibliographic and referencing systems, and submission processes are needed. Citing publications with retracted citations should be marked until authors resolve concerns.","PeriodicalId":50927,"journal":{"name":"Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance","volume":" ","pages":"14-37"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"10796932","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}

引用次数: 5

A policy toolkit for authorship and dissemination policies may benefit NIH research consortia. 作者身份和传播政策工具包可能有利于美国国立卫生研究院的研究联合体。

IF 3.4 1区哲学

Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance Pub Date : 2024-12-01 Epub Date: 2022-09-01 DOI: 10.1080/08989621.2022.2116318

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":"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.","PeriodicalId":50927,"journal":{"name":"Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance","volume":" ","pages":"222-240"},"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}

引用次数: 0

Procrastination and inconsistency: Expressions of concern for publications with compromised integrity. 拖延和前后不一：对有损诚信的出版物表示关注。

IF 3.4 1区哲学

Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance Pub Date : 2024-12-01 Epub Date: 2022-08-18 DOI: 10.1080/08989621.2022.2112572

Andrew Grey, Alison Avenell, Mark J Bolland

{"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":"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.","PeriodicalId":50927,"journal":{"name":"Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance","volume":" ","pages":"196-209"},"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}

引用次数: 0

The research literature is an unsafe workplace. 研究文献是一个不安全的工作场所。

IF 2.8 1区哲学

Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance Pub Date : 2024-11-11 DOI: 10.1080/08989621.2024.2428205

Jennifer A Byrne, Adrian G Barnett

{"title":"The research literature is an unsafe workplace.","authors":"Jennifer A Byrne, Adrian G Barnett","doi":"10.1080/08989621.2024.2428205","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2024.2428205","url":null,"abstract":"Research is conducted in workplaces that can present safety hazards. Where researchers work in laboratories, safety hazards can arise through the need to operate complex equipment that can become unsafe if faulty or broken. The research literature also represents a workplace for millions of scientists and scholars, where publications can be considered as key research equipment. This article compares our current capacity to flag and repair faulty equipment in research laboratories versus the literature. Whereas laboratory researchers can place written notices on faulty and broken equipment to flag problems and the need for repairs, researchers have limited capacity to flag faulty research publications to other users. We argue that our current inability to flag erroneous publications quickly and at scale, combined with the lack of real-world incentives for journals and publishers to direct adequate resources toward post-publication corrections, results in the research literature representing an increasingly unsafe workplace. We describe possible solutions, such as the capacity to transfer signed PubPeer notices describing verifiable errors to relevant publications, and the reactivation of PubMed Commons.","PeriodicalId":50927,"journal":{"name":"Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance","volume":" ","pages":"1-8"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8,"publicationDate":"2024-11-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142631579","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}

引用次数: 0

Does YouTube promote research ethics and conduct? A content analysis of Youtube Videos and analysis of sentiments through viewers comments. YouTube 是否促进了科研道德和行为？对 Youtube 视频的内容分析以及对观众评论的情感分析。

IF 2.8 1区哲学

Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance Pub Date : 2024-11-01 Epub Date: 2023-03-24 DOI: 10.1080/08989621.2023.2192404

Lulu Rout, Praliva Priyadarsini Khilar, Bijayalaxmi Rout

{"title":"Does YouTube promote research ethics and conduct? A content analysis of Youtube Videos and analysis of sentiments through viewers comments.","authors":"Lulu Rout, Praliva Priyadarsini Khilar, Bijayalaxmi Rout","doi":"10.1080/08989621.2023.2192404","DOIUrl":"10.1080/08989621.2023.2192404","url":null,"abstract":"More commonly today, research ethics and misconduct are ideas that are frequently violated. The availability of information sources and the dissemination of awareness among researchers can help to reduce this kind of violation. This study highlights how YouTube can be used to promote discussions of research misconduct and ethics. The study looked into how many videos there are on research ethics and misconduct, which colleges actively provide such videos, and how satisfied viewers are with the available videos by analyzing comments. Various software tools, including Webometric Analyst, R-studio, and Microsoft Excel, were applied for data collection and analysis. On 01-24-2023, 515 videos and 6984 comments were retrieved using the correct search queries that is \"Research ethics\" OR \"Research misconduct\" OR \"Research conduct\" OR \"Scientific integrity\" OR \"Research integrity\" OR \"Scientific misconduct.\" Results indicate that 2020 was the most significant year, since the most videos (241) were posted in this year. The channels titled \"PPIRCPSC, ABRIZAH A, and ALHOORI H\" upload 10, 9, and 8 videos respectively, placing them in the first, second, and third positions. By analyzing viewer comments, it was determined that the majority of comments were favorable, indicating that viewers are generally pleased with the available videos.","PeriodicalId":50927,"journal":{"name":"Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance","volume":" ","pages":"1024-1043"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"9166219","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}

引用次数: 0

Research misconduct and questionable research practices form a continuum. 研究不当行为和有问题的研究实践是一个连续统一体。

IF 2.8 1区哲学

Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance Pub Date : 2024-11-01 Epub Date: 2023-03-03 DOI: 10.1080/08989621.2023.2185141

Lex Bouter

引用次数: 0

Letter to editor: Academic journals should clarify the proportion of NLP-generated content in papers. 致编辑的信：学术期刊应明确论文中NLP生成内容的比例。

IF 2.8 1区哲学

Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance Pub Date : 2024-11-01 Epub Date: 2023-02-21 DOI: 10.1080/08989621.2023.2180359

Gengyan Tang

引用次数: 0

How often are replication attempts questioned? 复制尝试多久会受到质疑？

IF 2.8 1区哲学

Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance Pub Date : 2024-11-01 Epub Date: 2023-04-05 DOI: 10.1080/08989621.2023.2198126

Przemysław G Hensel

{"title":"How often are replication attempts questioned?","authors":"Przemysław G Hensel","doi":"10.1080/08989621.2023.2198126","DOIUrl":"10.1080/08989621.2023.2198126","url":null,"abstract":"Fear of retaliation from the original authors and their allies has been proposed as one of the explanations for the paucity of replications. In the current paper the frequency of negative responses to replications in psychology, and the attention such responses attract, was measured in a series of three studies. Study 1 indicates that replications do not attract more negative mentions in literature than randomly selected non-replication papers unless they are independent and failed, in which case a small increase in negative mentions was noticed, although replications with open data were less likely to attract such mentions. Moreover, no difference in attracting comments on a post-publication peer-review site between replications and non-replication papers was found. Study 2 shows that independent failed and partially successful replications are more likely to attract stand-alone replies than non-replication papers, but the risk is still small and is reduced for replications with open data. Study 3 indicates that stand-alone replies to replications attract fewer citations and readers than the replications to which they respond. I conclude that scientists' unwillingness to criticize published research, cited as one of the reasons for the paucity of replications, also benefits replicators by largely shielding their research from questioning.","PeriodicalId":50927,"journal":{"name":"Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance","volume":" ","pages":"1044-1061"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"9602291","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}

引用次数: 0

The trinity of good research: Distinguishing between research integrity, ethics, and governance. 良好研究的三位一体：区分研究诚信、伦理和管理。

IF 2.8 1区哲学

Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance Pub Date : 2024-11-01 Epub Date: 2023-07-25 DOI: 10.1080/08989621.2023.2239712

Simon E Kolstoe, Jonathan Pugh

{"title":"The trinity of good research: Distinguishing between research integrity, ethics, and governance.","authors":"Simon E Kolstoe, Jonathan Pugh","doi":"10.1080/08989621.2023.2239712","DOIUrl":"10.1080/08989621.2023.2239712","url":null,"abstract":"The words integrity, ethics, and governance are used interchangeably in relation to research. This masks important differences that must be understood when trying to address concerns regarding research culture. While progress has been made in identifying negative aspects of research culture (such as inequalities in hiring/promotion, perverse incentives, etc.) and practical issues that lead to research waste (outcome reporting bias, reproducibility, etc.), the responsibility for addressing these problems can be unclear due to the complexity of the research environment. One solution is to provide a clearer distinction between the perspectives of \"Research Integrity,\" \"Research Ethics,\" and \"Research Governance.\" Here, it is proposed that Research Integrity should be understood as focused on the character of researchers, and consequently the responsibility for promoting it lies primarily with researchers themselves. This is a different perspective from Research Ethics, which is focused on judgments on the ethical acceptability of research, and should primarily be the responsibility of research ethics committees, often including input from the public as well as the research community. Finally, Research Governance focuses on legal and policy requirements, and although complementary to research integrity and ethics, is primarily the responsibility of expert research support officers with the skills and experience to address technical compliance.","PeriodicalId":50927,"journal":{"name":"Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance","volume":" ","pages":"1222-1241"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"10101984","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}

引用次数: 0