Literature DB >> 28913604

Differing Perceptions Concerning Research Integrity Between Universities and Industry: A Qualitative Study.

Simon Godecharle1, Benoit Nemery2, Kris Dierickx3.   

Abstract

Despite the ever increasing collaboration between industry and universities, the previous empirical studies on research integrity and misconduct excluded participants of biomedical industry. Hence, there is a lack of empirical data on how research managers and biomedical researchers active in industry perceive the issues of research integrity and misconduct, and whether or not their perspectives differ from those of researchers and research managers active in universities. If various standards concerning research integrity and misconduct are upheld between industry and universities, this might undermine research collaborations. Therefore we performed a qualitative study by conducting 22 semi-structured interviews in order to investigate and compare the perspectives and attitudes concerning the issues of research integrity and misconduct of research managers and biomedical researchers active in industry and universities. Our study showed clear discrepancies between both groups. Diverse strategies in order to manage research misconduct and to stimulate research integrity were observed. Different definitions of research misconduct were given, indicating that similar actions are judged heterogeneously. There were also differences at an individual level, whether the interviewees were active in industry or universities. Overall, the management of research integrity proves to be a difficult exercise, due to many diverse perspectives on several essential elements connected to research integrity and misconduct. A management policy that is not in line with the vision of the biomedical researchers and research managers is at risk of being inefficient.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Industry; Research integrity; Research misconduct; University

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28913604     DOI: 10.1007/s11948-017-9965-4

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


  20 in total

1.  Scientists behaving badly.

Authors:  Brian C Martinson; Melissa S Anderson; Raymond de Vries
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2005-06-09       Impact factor: 49.962

2.  Research misconduct identified by the US Food and Drug Administration: out of sight, out of mind, out of the peer-reviewed literature.

Authors:  Charles Seife
Journal:  JAMA Intern Med       Date:  2015-04       Impact factor: 21.873

3.  The qualitative content analysis process.

Authors:  Satu Elo; Helvi Kyngäs
Journal:  J Adv Nurs       Date:  2008-04       Impact factor: 3.187

4.  What do mentoring and training in the responsible conduct of research have to do with scientists' misbehavior? Findings from a National Survey of NIH-funded scientists.

Authors:  Melissa S Anderson; Aaron S Horn; Kelly R Risbey; Emily A Ronning; Raymond De Vries; Brian C Martinson
Journal:  Acad Med       Date:  2007-09       Impact factor: 6.893

5.  Drug development. Corruption and research fraud send big chill through big pharma in China.

Authors:  Mara Hvistendahl
Journal:  Science       Date:  2013-08-02       Impact factor: 47.728

6.  Repairing research integrity.

Authors:  Sandra L Titus; James A Wells; Lawrence J Rhoades
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2008-06-19       Impact factor: 49.962

7.  Impugning the integrity of medical science: the adverse effects of industry influence.

Authors:  Catherine D DeAngelis; Phil B Fontanarosa
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2008-04-16       Impact factor: 56.272

8.  Conflicts of interest: part 1: Reconnecting the dots--reinterpreting industry-physician relations.

Authors:  Lisa Rosenbaum
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2015-05-07       Impact factor: 91.245

9.  Guidance on research integrity: no union in Europe.

Authors:  S Godecharle; B Nemery; K Dierickx
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2013-03-30       Impact factor: 79.321

10.  Scientists Still Behaving Badly? A Survey Within Industry and Universities.

Authors:  Simon Godecharle; Steffen Fieuws; Ben Nemery; Kris Dierickx
Journal:  Sci Eng Ethics       Date:  2017-10-02       Impact factor: 3.525

View more
  3 in total

1.  An Ethics of the System: Talking to Scientists About Research Integrity.

Authors:  Sarah R Davies
Journal:  Sci Eng Ethics       Date:  2018-09-24       Impact factor: 3.525

2.  Assessing the climate for research ethics in labs: Development and validation of a brief measure.

Authors:  Erin D Solomon; Tammy English; Matthew Wroblewski; James M DuBois; Alison L Antes
Journal:  Account Res       Date:  2021-02-04       Impact factor: 2.622

3.  Stakeholders' Experiences of Research Integrity Support in Universities: A Qualitative Study in Three European Countries.

Authors:  Natalie Evans; Ivan Buljan; Emanuele Valenti; Lex Bouter; Ana Marušić; Raymond de Vries; Guy Widdershoven
Journal:  Sci Eng Ethics       Date:  2022-08-30       Impact factor: 3.777

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.