Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance最新文献_第10页

Ten Years later: Assessments of the integrity of publications from one research group with multiple retractions. 十年之后：对一个多次撤回论文的研究小组所发表论文的完整性进行评估。

IF 3.4 1区哲学

Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance Pub Date : 2023-12-20 DOI: 10.1080/08989621.2023.2295996

Andrew Grey, Alison Avenell, Mark J Bolland

{"title":"Ten Years later: Assessments of the integrity of publications from one research group with multiple retractions.","authors":"Andrew Grey, Alison Avenell, Mark J Bolland","doi":"10.1080/08989621.2023.2295996","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2023.2295996","url":null,"abstract":"When a research group has multiple retracted publications and/or research misconduct by a member is evident, there is a risk that its other publications are unreliable, so a comprehensive assessment of the group's publications is advisable. We analyzed the comprehensiveness of assessment of the integrity of 300 publications by a research group with numerous retractions and known research misconduct, for 292 of which we raised concerns to publishers and academic institutions between 3/2013 and 2/2020. By 4/2023, 91 (30%) publications had not been assessed by either publisher or academic institution. Publishers had assessed 185 (63%) publications. The 4 academic institutions had assessed 5/36 (14%), 56/216 (26%), 30/50 (60%) and 40/66 (61%) publications. Unprompted assessments, those undertaken without our notification of concerns, occurred for 24 (8%) publications, 3 (1%) by publishers and 21 (7%) by academic institutions. Among 32 journals with ≥2 affected publications, no unprompted assessments of the remaining publication(s) occurred after notification of concerns about the index publication(s). Publishers retracted 58/84 (69%) publications which institutions also assessed and decided needed no editorial action. These analyses demonstrate the failure of publishers and institutions to comprehensively and spontaneously determine the integrity of publications in a setting of known misconduct and multiple retractions.","PeriodicalId":50927,"journal":{"name":"Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2023-12-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138813094","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

Correlation between journal metrics-based academic evaluation and researchers' ethics. 基于期刊指标的学术评价与研究人员职业道德之间的相关性。

IF 3.4 1区哲学

Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance Pub Date : 2023-12-18 DOI: 10.1080/08989621.2023.2295415

Lidija Ivanović, Philipp Baaden, Miloš Jovanović, Dragan Ivanović

{"title":"Correlation between journal metrics-based academic evaluation and researchers' ethics.","authors":"Lidija Ivanović, Philipp Baaden, Miloš Jovanović, Dragan Ivanović","doi":"10.1080/08989621.2023.2295415","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2023.2295415","url":null,"abstract":"The \"publish or perish\" approach has become an integral part of an academic's life when seeking positions, striving for promotions, or competing for funding. This approach often hinges on journal-based metrics which push researchers to seek publication in journals indexed in the Web of Science. Due to the pressure to publish a certain number of publications in journals indexed in the Web of Science, researchers might attempt to find a journal with a lower impact factor, i.e., less popular and visible journals in the scientific community. Even more concerning is the fact that researchers might publish their results in predatory journals. This paper analyzes the consequence of introducing a journal indicators-based academic evaluation by analyzing productivity and publication patterns of researchers. Moreover, this paper investigates the correlation between journal-based academic evaluation rules and researchers' ethics. The analysis is based on bibliometric data collected from the Web of Science database. The case study subject is the Serbian research landscape before and after the introduction of a journal metrics-based academic evaluation.","PeriodicalId":50927,"journal":{"name":"Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2023-12-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138813092","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

Safeguarding scientific integrity: A case study in examining manipulation in the peer review process. 维护科学诚信：审查同行评审过程中的操纵行为的案例研究。

IF 3.4 1区哲学

Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance Pub Date : 2023-12-11 DOI: 10.1080/08989621.2023.2292043

Leslie D McIntosh, Cynthia Hudson Vitale

引用次数: 0

Evolution and characterization of health sciences paper retractions in Brazil and Portugal. 巴西和葡萄牙健康科学论文撤回的演变和特点。

IF 3.4 1区哲学

Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance Pub Date : 2023-12-01 Epub Date: 2022-06-03 DOI: 10.1080/08989621.2022.2080549

Cristina Candal-Pedreira, Alberto Ruano-Ravina, Julia Rey-Brandariz, Nerea Mourino, Sofia Ravara, Pedro Aguiar, Mónica Pérez-Ríos

{"title":"Evolution and characterization of health sciences paper retractions in Brazil and Portugal.","authors":"Cristina Candal-Pedreira, Alberto Ruano-Ravina, Julia Rey-Brandariz, Nerea Mourino, Sofia Ravara, Pedro Aguiar, Mónica Pérez-Ríos","doi":"10.1080/08989621.2022.2080549","DOIUrl":"10.1080/08989621.2022.2080549","url":null,"abstract":"The retraction of health sciences publications is a growing concern. To understand the patterns in a particular country-context and design specific measures to address the problem, it is important to describe and characterize retractions. We aimed to assess the evolution of health science retractions in Brazil and Portugal and to describe their features. We conducted a cross-sectional study including all health sciences retracted articles with at least one author affiliated to a Portuguese or Brazilian institution identified through Retraction Watch database. A total of 182 retracted articles were identified. The number of retractions increased over time, but the proportion related to the whole of publications remained stable. A total of 50.0% and 60.8% of the Portuguese and Brazilian retracted articles, respectively, were published in first and second quartile journals. Scientific misconduct accounted for 60.1% and 55.9% of retractions in Brazil and Portugal. In both countries, the most frequent cause of misconduct was plagiarism. The time from publication to retraction decreases as the journal quartile increases. The retraction of health sciences articles did not decrease over time in Brazil and Portugal. There is a need to develop strategies aimed at preventing, monitoring and managing scientific misconduct according to the country context.","PeriodicalId":50927,"journal":{"name":"Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41139112","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: 2

Jumping with a parachute - is promoting research integrity meaningful? 跳伞——促进研究的完整性有意义吗？

IF 3.4 1区哲学

Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance Pub Date : 2023-12-01 Epub Date: 2022-03-04 DOI: 10.1080/08989621.2022.2044318

Loreta Tauginienė, Inga Gaižauskaitė

引用次数: 0

Factors influencing the promotion and implementation of research integrity in research performing and research funding organizations: A scoping review. 影响研究执行和研究资助组织促进和实施研究诚信的因素：范围界定审查。

IF 3.4 1区哲学

Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance Pub Date : 2023-12-01 Epub Date: 2022-06-17 DOI: 10.1080/08989621.2022.2073819

Rea Roje, Andrea Reyes Elizondo, Wolfgang Kaltenbrunner, Ivan Buljan, Ana Marušić

{"title":"Factors influencing the promotion and implementation of research integrity in research performing and research funding organizations: A scoping review.","authors":"Rea Roje, Andrea Reyes Elizondo, Wolfgang Kaltenbrunner, Ivan Buljan, Ana Marušić","doi":"10.1080/08989621.2022.2073819","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2022.2073819","url":null,"abstract":"Promoting and implementing research integrity is considered the joint responsibility and effort of multiple stakeholders in the research community. We conducted a scoping review and analyzed 236 research articles and gray literature publications from biomedical sciences, social sciences, natural sciences (including engineering), and humanities that dealt with the factors that may positively or negatively impact the promotion and implementation of research integrity. Critical appraisal of evidence was performed for studies describing interventions aimed at research integrity promotion in order to provide insight into the effectiveness of these interventions. The results of this scoping review provide a comprehensive taxonomy of factors with positive or negative impact and their relatedness to individual researchers, research performing and funding organizations, and the system of science. Moreover, the results show that efforts for fostering and promoting research integrity should be implemented at all three levels (researcher, institution, system) simultaneously to deliver greater adherence and implementation of research integrity practices. Although various educational interventions aiming at research integrity promotion exist, we were not able to conclude on the effectiveness of explored interventions due to the methodological quality issues in the studies.","PeriodicalId":50927,"journal":{"name":"Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41219416","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: 7

In Memoriam Dr. Sheldon Krimsky. 纪念谢尔登·克里姆斯基博士。

IF 3.4 1区哲学

Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance Pub Date : 2023-12-01 Epub Date: 2022-05-25 DOI: 10.1080/08989621.2022.2075187

Lisa M Rasmussen, Adil E Shamoo

引用次数: 0

How do researchers perceive research misbehaviors? A case study of Indian researchers. 研究人员如何看待研究不端行为？印度研究人员的案例研究。

IF 3.4 1区哲学

Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance Pub Date : 2023-12-01 Epub Date: 2022-05-25 DOI: 10.1080/08989621.2022.2078712

Ishfaq Ahmad Palla, Mangkhollen Singson

{"title":"How do researchers perceive research misbehaviors? A case study of Indian researchers.","authors":"Ishfaq Ahmad Palla, Mangkhollen Singson","doi":"10.1080/08989621.2022.2078712","DOIUrl":"10.1080/08989621.2022.2078712","url":null,"abstract":"Despite ample evidence of increasing research misconduct in India, little attention has been paid to understanding researchers' perception of research integrity and research misconduct among young Indian researchers. Interviews among 30 research scholars were conducted at Pondicherry University in India to understand their experience and perception of research misconduct. The top three influencing factors for scientific misconduct, according to the participants, were unavailability of adequate funds (35%), pressure from research supervisors (29%), and desperation to publish articles (25%). The participants had witnessed research misconduct in different forms i.e., data fabrication, falsification, and plagiarism. However, plagiarism was the most often cited cause of misbehavior in our interviews. Majority of participants have witnessed or personally encountered multiple instances where authorship conflicts occurred. The other questionable research practices highlighted in the study were improper citations, authorship disputes like gift and ghost authorships, misrepresentation of statistical data, failure to publish negative results. In an increasingly diverse and changing research environment, our research calls for practical research guidelines based on honesty, openness, and accountability that can help articulate and strengthen scientists' core values. More importantly, scientific misconduct can only be prevented by using a multifaceted strategy that includes identifying instances of scientific misconduct and implementing suitable deterrents and treatments that could change the behavior associated with such misconduct.","PeriodicalId":50927,"journal":{"name":"Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41172372","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: 3

Should informed consent and information related to patient recruitment in clinical trials be available to the reader of scientific articles? A case study in dentistry. 科学文章的读者是否应该获得临床试验中患者招募的知情同意书和相关信息？牙科案例研究。

IF 3.4 1区哲学

Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance Pub Date : 2023-12-01 Epub Date: 2022-05-27 DOI: 10.1080/08989621.2022.2078711

Clovis Mariano Faggion

{"title":"Should informed consent and information related to patient recruitment in clinical trials be available to the reader of scientific articles? A case study in dentistry.","authors":"Clovis Mariano Faggion","doi":"10.1080/08989621.2022.2078711","DOIUrl":"10.1080/08989621.2022.2078711","url":null,"abstract":"Ethical aspects in research should be transparently reported. This study aimed to investigate whether informed consent and information related to patient recruitment in clinical studies are well reported in the scientific literature. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) on root coverage procedures published between November 2016 and November 2021 were selected from the PubMed database. Items/questions were used to guide the extraction of data related to patient recruitment, with a focus on the detailed report of informed consent used to clarify the research to the patient. Data were extracted from the published article and the respective research protocol published in a public registry. Information related to potential selective outcome reporting (SOR) was also extracted. In total, 187 documents were initially screened and 74 reports of RCTs were included. No informed consent was published in the article. Only one research protocol provided a link to the informed consent. Deviations from reporting in the research protocol and published article were found, suggesting SOR. Informed consent and information related to patient recruitment in RCTs on root covering procedures are severely underreported. The present findings may stimulate further discussion and debate on the need for making this information publicly available.","PeriodicalId":50927,"journal":{"name":"Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41146148","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: 1

The landscape of the characteristics, citations, scientific, technological, and altmetrics impacts of retracted papers in hematology. 血液学中撤回论文的特征、引用、科学、技术和替代计量学影响的景观。

IF 3.4 1区哲学

Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance Pub Date : 2023-12-01 Epub Date: 2021-10-19 DOI: 10.1080/08989621.2021.1990049

Sirous Panahi, Samira Soleimanpour

{"title":"The landscape of the characteristics, citations, scientific, technological, and altmetrics impacts of retracted papers in hematology.","authors":"Sirous Panahi, Samira Soleimanpour","doi":"10.1080/08989621.2021.1990049","DOIUrl":"10.1080/08989621.2021.1990049","url":null,"abstract":"Retraction is a mechanism for eliminating and correcting serious problems in the scientific literature and increasing awareness among members of the scientific community about unreliable literature. The objectives of this study were to identify the characteristics and reasons for retraction, analyze citations, and describe the scientific, altmetrics, and technological impacts of hematology retracted papers. Retracted papers were searched using the hematology category of the Web of Science database. The search yielded 101 retracted papers in WoS. Statistics methods such as frequency, mean, interquartile range (IQR), and Pearson's Correlation were used for data analysis. The findings showed the retracted papers were published in 28 different hematology journals. The majority of retracted documents were in Article type (n = 81). The mean time interval of the retracted papers from the first publication to retraction was 50.83 months. The largest number of retracted papers belonged to the United States (n = 46). The most frequently reported reason for retraction was misconduct (n = 55). The findings of this study provide a landscape into the characteristics and citations of retracted papers before and after retraction in addition to the scientific, technological, and altmetrics impacts of hematology retracted papers in the scientific community.","PeriodicalId":50927,"journal":{"name":"Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"9925798","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: 4