Dataset Information

Estimating the prevalence of researcher misconduct: a study of UK academics within biological sciences.

ABSTRACT: Misconduct in academic research is undoubtedly increasing, but studies estimating the prevalence of such behaviour suffer from biases inherent in researching sensitive topics. We compared the unmatched-count technique (UCT) and the crosswise-model (CM), two methods specifically designed to increase honest reporting to sensitive questions, with direct questioning (DQ) for five types of misconduct in the biological sciences. UCT performed better than CM and either outperformed or produced similar estimates to DQ depending on the question. Estimates of academic misconduct increased with decreasing seriousness of the behaviour, from c. 0% for data fabrication to >68% for inappropriate co-authorship. Results show that research into even minor issues of misconduct, is sensitive, suggesting that future studies should consider using specialised questioning techniques as they are more likely to yield accurate figures.

SUBMITTER: Roberts DL

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4168756 | biostudies-literature | 2014

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Estimating the prevalence of researcher misconduct: a study of UK academics within biological sciences.

Roberts David L DL St John Freya A V FA

PeerJ 20140909

Misconduct in academic research is undoubtedly increasing, but studies estimating the prevalence of such behaviour suffer from biases inherent in researching sensitive topics. We compared the unmatched-count technique (UCT) and the crosswise-model (CM), two methods specifically designed to increase honest reporting to sensitive questions, with direct questioning (DQ) for five types of misconduct in the biological sciences. UCT performed better than CM and either outperformed or produced similar ...[more]

PMID: 25250215

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundMeasures to ensure research integrity have been widely discussed due to the social, economic and scientific impact of research integrity. In the past few years, financial support for health research in emerging countries has steadily increased, resulting in a growing number of scientific publications. These achievements, however, have been accompanied by a rise in retracted publications followed by concerns about the quality and reliability of such publications.ObjectiveThis systematic review aimed to investigate the profile of medical and life sciences research retractions from authors affiliated with Brazilian academic institutions. The chronological trend between publication and retraction date, reasons for the retraction, citation of the article after the retraction, study design, and the number of retracted publications by author and affiliation were assessed. Additionally, the quality, availability and accessibility of data regarding retracted papers from the publishers are described.MethodsTwo independent reviewers searched for articles that had been retracted since 2004 via PubMed, Web of Science, Biblioteca Virtual em Saúde (BVS) and Google Scholar databases. Indexed keywords from Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) and Descritores em Ciências da Saúde (DeCS) in Portuguese, English or Spanish were used. Data were also collected from the Retraction Watch website (www.retractionwatch.com). This study was registered with the PROSPERO systematic review database (CRD42017071647).ResultsA final sample of 65 articles was retrieved from 55 different journals with reported impact factors ranging from 0 to 32.86, with a median value of 4.40 and a mean of 4.69. The types of documents found were erratum (1), retracted articles (3), retracted articles with a retraction notice (5), retraction notices with erratum (3), and retraction notices (45). The assessment of the Retraction Watch website added 8 articles that were not identified by the search strategy using the bibliographic databases. The retracted publications covered a wide range of study designs. Experimental studies (40) and literature reviews (15) accounted for 84.6% of the retracted articles. Within the field of health and life sciences, medical science was the field with the largest number of retractions (34), followed by biological sciences (17). Some articles were retracted for at least two distinct reasons (13). Among the retrieved articles, plagiarism was the main reason for retraction (60%). Missing data were found in 57% of the retraction notices, which was a limitation to this review. In addition, 63% of the articles were cited after their retraction.ConclusionPublications are not retracted solely for research misconduct but also for honest error. Nevertheless, considering authors affiliated with Brazilian institutions, this review concluded that most of the retracted health and life sciences publications were retracted due to research misconduct. Because the number of publications is the most valued indicator of scientific productivity for funding and career progression purposes, a systematic effort from the national research councils, funding agencies, universities and scientific journals is needed to avoid an escalating trend of research misconduct. More investigations are needed to comprehend the underlying factors of research misconduct and its increasing manifestation.

Project description:BackgroundEstimates of the total number of prevalent HIV infections attributable to the major routes of infection make an important contribution to public health policy, as they are used for planning services.MethodsIn the UK, estimates were derived through the "direct method" which estimated the total number of diagnosed and undiagnosed HIV infections in the population. The direct method has been improved over a number of years since first used in 1994, as further data became available such as the inclusion of newly available behavioural survey data both from the National Survey of Sexual Attitudes and Lifestyles (Natsal 2000) and community surveys of men who have sex with men (MSM). These data were used to re-estimate numbers of people unaware of their infection and provided ethnic breakdowns within behavioural categories. The total population was divided into 10 mutually exclusive behavioural categories relevant to HIV risk in the UK-for example, MSM and injecting drug users. Estimates of the population size within each group were derived from Natsal 2000 and National Statistics mid-year population estimates. The total number of undiagnosed HIV infections was calculated by multiplying the undiagnosed HIV prevalence for each group, derived from the Unlinked Anonymous HIV Prevalence Monitoring Programme surveys (UAPMP), by the population size. These estimates were then added to the prevalent diagnosed HIV infections within each group derived from the national census of diagnosed HIV infections, the Survey of Prevalent HIV Infections Diagnosed (SOPHID). The estimates were then adjusted to include all adults in the UK. Because undiagnosed HIV prevalence estimates were not available for each of the behavioural categories, the UAPMP prevalence estimates were adjusted using available data to provide the best estimates for each group.ResultsIt is estimated that 53,000 individuals are infected with HIV in the UK in 2003, of whom 27% were unaware of their infection. Of the total of 53,000, an estimated 26,000 were among heterosexually infected and 24,500 among MSM.ConclusionThe direct method uses an explicit framework and data from different components of the HIV surveillance system to estimate HIV prevalence in the UK, allowing for a comprehensive picture of the epidemic.

Dataset Information

Estimating the prevalence of researcher misconduct: a study of UK academics within biological sciences.

Publications

Estimating the prevalence of researcher misconduct: a study of UK academics within biological sciences.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets