Literature DB >> 17526690

Scientific misconduct from the perspective of research coordinators: a national survey.

Erica R Pryor1, Barbara Habermann, Marion E Broome.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To report results from a national survey of coordinators and managers of clinical research studies in the US on their perceptions of and experiences with scientific misconduct.
METHODS: Data were collected using the Scientific Misconduct Questionnaire-Revised. Eligible responses were received from 1645 of 5302 (31%) surveys sent to members of the Association of Clinical Research Professionals and to subscribers of Research Practitioner, published by the Center for Clinical Research Practice, between February 2004 and January 2005.
FINDINGS: Overall, the perceived frequency of misconduct was low. Differences were noted between workplaces with regard to perceived pressures on investigators and research coordinators, and on the effectiveness of the regulatory environment in reducing misconduct. First-hand experience with an incident of misconduct was reported by 18% of respondents. Those with first-hand knowledge of misconduct were more likely to report working in an academic medical setting, and to report that a typical research coordinator would probably do nothing if aware that a principal investigator or research staff member was involved in an incident of misconduct.
CONCLUSION: These findings expand the knowledge on scientific misconduct by adding new information from the perspective of research coordinators. The findings provide some data supporting the influence of workplace climate on misconduct and also on the perceived effectiveness of institutional policies to reduce scientific misconduct.

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17526690      PMCID: PMC2598278          DOI: 10.1136/jme.2006.016394

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Med Ethics        ISSN: 0306-6800            Impact factor:   2.903


  13 in total

1.  A survey of newly appointed consultants' attitudes towards research fraud.

Authors:  D Geggie
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  2001-10       Impact factor: 2.903

2.  Fraud in medical research: an international survey of biostatisticians. ISCB Subcommittee on Fraud.

Authors:  J Ranstam; M Buyse; S L George; S Evans; N L Geller; B Scherrer; E Lesaffre; G Murray; L Edler; J L Hutton; T Colton; P Lachenbruch
Journal:  Control Clin Trials       Date:  2000-10

3.  Fraud will out--or will it?

Authors:  June Price Tangney
Journal:  New Sci       Date:  1987-08-06       Impact factor: 0.319

4.  Authors' reports about research integrity problems in clinical trials.

Authors:  William Gardner; Charles W Lidz; Kathryn C Hartwig
Journal:  Contemp Clin Trials       Date:  2005-04       Impact factor: 2.226

5.  The Scientific Misconduct Questionnaire--Revised (SMQ-R): validation and psychometric testing.

Authors:  Marion E Broome; Erica Pryor; Barbara Habermann; Leavonne Pulley; Harold Kincaid
Journal:  Account Res       Date:  2005 Oct-Dec       Impact factor: 2.622

6.  Preventing scientific misconduct.

Authors:  D L Weed
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  1998-01       Impact factor: 9.308

7.  Perceptions of scientific misconduct in nursing.

Authors:  M Rankin; M D Esteves
Journal:  Nurs Res       Date:  1997 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 2.381

8.  The development and psychometric evaluation of the Ethical Issues Scale.

Authors:  S T Fry; M E Duffy
Journal:  J Nurs Scholarsh       Date:  2001       Impact factor: 3.176

9.  [Dishonesty in medical research. A questionnaire study among project administrators in Health Region 4].

Authors:  A Hals; G Jacobsen
Journal:  Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen       Date:  1993-10-20

10.  A successful system of scientific data audits for clinical trials. A report from the Cancer and Leukemia Group B.

Authors:  R B Weiss; N J Vogelzang; B A Peterson; L C Panasci; J T Carpenter; M Gavigan; K Sartell; E Frei; O R McIntyre
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1993-07-28       Impact factor: 56.272

View more
  17 in total

1.  Publication ethics from the perspective of PhD students of health sciences: a limited experience.

Authors:  Berna Arda
Journal:  Sci Eng Ethics       Date:  2011-02-12       Impact factor: 3.525

2.  How closely do institutional review boards follow the common rule?

Authors:  Charles W Lidz; Paul S Appelbaum; Robert Arnold; Philip Candilis; William Gardner; Suzanne Myers; Lorna Simon
Journal:  Acad Med       Date:  2012-07       Impact factor: 6.893

3.  In Their Own Words: Research Misconduct from the Perspective of Researchers in Malaysian Universities.

Authors:  Angelina P Olesen; Latifah Amin; Zurina Mahadi
Journal:  Sci Eng Ethics       Date:  2017-12-16       Impact factor: 3.525

4.  Are Leadership and Management Essential for Good Research? An Interview Study of Genetic Researchers.

Authors:  Alison L Antes; Adelina Mart; James M DuBois
Journal:  J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics       Date:  2016-09-21       Impact factor: 1.742

5.  Prevalence of scientific misconduct among a group of researchers in Nigeria.

Authors:  Patrick Okonta; Theresa Rossouw
Journal:  Dev World Bioeth       Date:  2012-09-20       Impact factor: 2.294

6.  Establishing good collaborative research practices in the responsible conduct of research in nursing science.

Authors:  Connie M Ulrich; Gwenyth R Wallen; Naixue Cui; Jesse Chittams; Monica Sweet; Dena Plemmons
Journal:  Nurs Outlook       Date:  2014-10-22       Impact factor: 3.250

7.  Research coordinators' experiences with scientific misconduct and research integrity.

Authors:  Barbara Habermann; Marion Broome; Erica R Pryor; Kim Wagler Ziner
Journal:  Nurs Res       Date:  2010 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 2.381

8.  Prevalence of industry support and its relationship to research integrity.

Authors:  Patricia M Tereskerz; Ann B Hamric; Thomas M Guterbock; Jonathan D Moreno
Journal:  Account Res       Date:  2009 Apr-Jun       Impact factor: 2.622

9.  A Cross-Sectional Survey Study to Assess Prevalence and Attitudes Regarding Research Misconduct among Investigators in the Middle East.

Authors:  Marwan Felaefel; Mohamed Salem; Rola Jaafar; Ghufran Jassim; Hillary Edwards; Fiza Rashid-Doubell; Reham Yousri; Nahed M Ali; Henry Silverman
Journal:  J Acad Ethics       Date:  2017-10-13

10.  Scientific dishonesty--a nationwide survey of doctoral students in Norway.

Authors:  Bjørn Hofmann; Anne Ingeborg Myhr; Søren Holm
Journal:  BMC Med Ethics       Date:  2013-01-05       Impact factor: 2.652

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.