Literature DB >> 26758253

Commentary: Legacy of the Commission on Research Integrity.

Barbara K Redman1.   

Abstract

20 years ago, the Report of the Commission on Research Integrity (also known as the Ryan Commission after its chair) was submitted to the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services and to House and Senate Committees. As directed in enabling legislation, the Commission had provided recommendations on a new definition of research misconduct, oversight of scientific practices, and development of a regulation to protect whistleblowers. Reflecting the ethos of the time, the Commission recommended that institutions receiving Public Health Service research funding should provide oversight of all but the most egregious misconduct. The suggested definition of research misconduct was organized around misappropriation, interference and misrepresentation, which would have addressed collaborative/authorship disputes and sabotage in scientific laboratories, both of which remain unaddressed in current policy. The Commission also recommended the Whistleblower Bill of Rights and Responsibilities which would have authorized remedies for whistleblowers who experienced retaliation and sanctions against retaliators. Response from the scientific community was highly critical, and none of the Commission's recommendations was accepted. No new body has examined issues within the Commission's charge, there has been no significant Congressional or public pressure to do so, institutions have not been able to sustain standards that would have avoided current concerns about bias and irreproducibility in research, and there is still no entity in science capable of addressing issues assigned to the Commission and other urgent issues.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Research ethics; Research misconduct; Research regulation; Whistleblowers

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26758253     DOI: 10.1007/s11948-016-9753-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Sci Eng Ethics        ISSN: 1353-3452            Impact factor:   3.525


  10 in total

1.  Developing a federal policy on research misconduct.

Authors:  Sybil Francis
Journal:  Sci Eng Ethics       Date:  1999-04       Impact factor: 3.525

2.  Sociology. Scientific misconduct: do the punishments fit the crime?

Authors:  Barbara K Redman; Jon F Merz
Journal:  Science       Date:  2008-08-08       Impact factor: 47.728

3.  The case of Vipul Bhrigu and the federal definition of research misconduct.

Authors:  Lisa M Rasmussen
Journal:  Sci Eng Ethics       Date:  2013-09-04       Impact factor: 3.525

4.  Hostile reception to US misconduct report.

Authors:  M Wadman
Journal:  Nature       Date:  1996-06-20       Impact factor: 49.962

5.  'Unrealistic' misconduct plans under fire.

Authors:  M Wadman
Journal:  Nature       Date:  1996-05-23       Impact factor: 49.962

6.  SCIENTIFIC INTEGRITY. Self-correction in science at work.

Authors:  Bruce Alberts; Ralph J Cicerone; Stephen E Fienberg; Alexander Kamb; Marcia McNutt; Robert M Nerem; Randy Schekman; Richard Shiffrin; Victoria Stodden; Subra Suresh; Maria T Zuber; Barbara Kline Pope; Kathleen Hall Jamieson
Journal:  Science       Date:  2015-06-26       Impact factor: 47.728

7.  Scientific misconduct. Sabotaged scientist sues Yale and her lab chief.

Authors:  Martin Enserink
Journal:  Science       Date:  2014-03-07       Impact factor: 47.728

8.  Research misconduct definitions adopted by U.S. research institutions.

Authors:  David B Resnik; Talicia Neal; Austin Raymond; Grace E Kissling
Journal:  Account Res       Date:  2015       Impact factor: 2.622

9.  How to make more published research true.

Authors:  John P A Ioannidis
Journal:  PLoS Med       Date:  2014-10-21       Impact factor: 11.069

10.  Why most published research findings are false.

Authors:  John P A Ioannidis
Journal:  PLoS Med       Date:  2005-08-30       Impact factor: 11.613

  10 in total
  1 in total

Review 1.  Ensuring due process in the IACUC and animal welfare setting: considerations in developing noncompliance policies and procedures for institutional animal care and use committees and institutional officials.

Authors:  Barbara C Hansen; Sylvia Gografe; Stacy Pritt; Kai-Lin Catherine Jen; Camille A McWhirter; Susan M Barman; Anthony Comuzzie; Molly Greene; Justin A McNulty; Daniel Eugene Michele; Naz Moaddab; Randall J Nelson; Karen Norris; Karen D Uray; Ron Banks; Karin N Westlund; Bill J Yates; Jerald Silverman; Kenneth D Hansen; Barbara Redman
Journal:  FASEB J       Date:  2017-08-15       Impact factor: 5.191

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.