Literature DB >> 29755305

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

Marwan Felaefel1, Mohamed Salem1, Rola Jaafar2, Ghufran Jassim3, Hillary Edwards4, Fiza Rashid-Doubell3, Reham Yousri5, Nahed M Ali6, Henry Silverman4.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Recent studies from Western countries indicate significant levels of questionable research practices, but similar data from low and middle-income countries are limited. Our aims were to assess the prevalence of and attitudes regarding research misconduct among researchers in several universities in the Middle East and to identify factors that might account for our findings.
METHODS: We distributed an anonymous questionnaire to a convenience sample of investigators at several universities in Egypt, Lebanon, and Bahrain. Participants were asked to a) self-report their extent of research misconducts, as well as their knowledge of colleagues engaging in similar research misconducts and b) provide their extent of agreement with certain attitudes about research misconduct. We used descriptive, bivariate, and multivariate logistic regression statistics to analyze the data.
RESULTS: Data from 278 participants showed a high prevalence of misconduct, as 59.4% of our respondents self-reported to committing at least one misbehaviors and 74.5% reported having knowledge of any misbehaviors among any of their colleagues. The most common type of self-report misconduct was "circumventing research ethics regulations" (50.5%) followed by "fabrication and falsification" (28.6%). A significant predictor of misconduct included a lack of "prior ethics training".
CONCLUSION: Scientific misconduct represents a significant issue in several universities in the Middle East. The demonstration that a lack of "prior ethics training" was a significant predictor of misconduct should lead to educational initiatives in research integrity. Further studies are needed to confirm whether our results can be generalized to other universities in the Middle East.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Middle East; research ethics; research misconduct; responsible conduct in research

Year:  2017        PMID: 29755305      PMCID: PMC5945220          DOI: 10.1007/s10805-017-9295-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Acad Ethics        ISSN: 1570-1727


  22 in total

1.  Effects of training in the responsible conduct of research: a survey of graduate students in experimental sciences.

Authors:  Sarah Brown; Michael W Kalichman
Journal:  Sci Eng Ethics       Date:  1998-10       Impact factor: 3.525

2.  Ethical issues in biomedical research: perceptions and practices of postdoctoral research fellows responding to a survey.

Authors:  Susan Eastwood; Pamela Derish; Evangeline Leash; Stephen Ordway
Journal:  Sci Eng Ethics       Date:  1996-01       Impact factor: 3.525

3.  A pilot study of biomedical trainees' perceptions concerning research ethics.

Authors:  M W Kalichman; P J Friedman
Journal:  Acad Med       Date:  1992-11       Impact factor: 6.893

4.  The role of culture in research misconduct.

Authors:  Mark S Davis
Journal:  Account Res       Date:  2003 Jul-Sep       Impact factor: 2.622

5.  Scientists behaving badly.

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

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

Authors:  Erica R Pryor; Barbara Habermann; Marion E Broome
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  2007-06       Impact factor: 2.903

7.  Falsified papers in high-impact journals were slow to retract and indistinguishable from nonfraudulent papers.

Authors:  Nikolaos A Trikalinos; Evangelos Evangelou; John P A Ioannidis
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2008-05       Impact factor: 6.437

8.  Publication misconduct among medical professionals in India.

Authors:  Dhulika Dhingra; Devendra Mishra
Journal:  Indian J Med Ethics       Date:  2014-04-01

9.  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

10.  Purposeful selection of variables in logistic regression.

Authors:  Zoran Bursac; C Heath Gauss; David Keith Williams; David W Hosmer
Journal:  Source Code Biol Med       Date:  2008-12-16
View more
  5 in total

1.  Current Status of Research Ethics Capacity in Myanmar.

Authors:  Zaw-Zaw Oo; Yin-Thet-Nu Oo; Mo-Mo Than; Khine Zaw Oo; Min Wun; Kyaw-Soe Htun; Henry Silverman
Journal:  Asian Bioeth Rev       Date:  2018-07-21

2.  Validation of thermophysical data for scientific and engineering applications.

Authors:  Vladimir Diky; Ala Bazyleva; Eugene Paulechka; Joseph W Magee; Vikina Martinez; Demian Riccardi; Kenneth Kroenlein
Journal:  J Chem Thermodyn       Date:  2019       Impact factor: 3.178

3.  Knowledge, Awareness, Attitudes, and Practices towards Research Ethics and Research Ethics Committees among Myanmar Post-graduate Students.

Authors:  Mo Mo Than; Hein Htike; Henry J Silverman
Journal:  Asian Bioeth Rev       Date:  2020-09-26

4.  Questionable Research Practices and Misconduct Among Norwegian Researchers.

Authors:  Matthias Kaiser; Laura Drivdal; Johs Hjellbrekke; Helene Ingierd; Ole Bjørn Rekdal
Journal:  Sci Eng Ethics       Date:  2021-12-21       Impact factor: 3.525

5.  Reliability and validation of an attitude scale regarding responsible conduct in research.

Authors:  Samar Abd ElHafeez; Mohamed Salem; Henry J Silverman
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-03-16       Impact factor: 3.240

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.