Literature DB >> 33877028

Ethical Perspectives of Chinese and United States Physicians at Initiation of a Research Collaborative.

Christopher Grondin1, Yali Cong2, Nahid Keshavarzi3, Michael E Geisser4, Joseph C Kolars1, Raymond J Hutchinson5.   

Abstract

Variances in perceived standards regarding research integrity appear to exist between China and the U.S. An established joint institute for translational and clinical research between one Chinese and one U.S. health system provides a valuable venue in which to evaluate these perceptions better. We therefore undertook a survey of 209 physicians at the two institutions in 2013-14. The vast majority of physicians from both institutions understood the necessity of obtaining informed consent from research participants, the need to provide a description of the risks of participation, and the voluntary nature of research participation. However, there were differences in responses between the two sites in willingness to report plagiarism (U.S. 95.65% vs. Chinese 40.21%; p < .0001) and data falsification (U.S. 100% vs. Chinese 81.25%; p < .0001) and in willingness to attend biomedical industry-funded promotional events (U.S. 11.0% vs. Chinese 74.0%; p < .0001). When planning to conduct collaborative clinical research across cultures, particularly when uncertainty regarding the similarity of research cultures exists, exploration of cultural and ethical norms in research may be informative regarding educational needs and the risks of research and academic misconduct.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Research ethics; international research

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33877028      PMCID: PMC8589085          DOI: 10.1080/08989621.2021.1920014

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Account Res        ISSN: 0898-9621            Impact factor:   3.057


  23 in total

1.  Scientific misconduct: Chinese journals pledge crackdown.

Authors:  Justin Wang
Journal:  Science       Date:  1999-03-05       Impact factor: 47.728

2.  Chinese journal finds 31% of submissions plagiarized.

Authors:  Yuehong Zhang
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2010-09-09       Impact factor: 49.962

3.  China's medical research integrity.

Authors:  Xin-Wu Cui; Hong-Li Yue; Quan-Cheng Kan
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2015-08-08       Impact factor: 79.321

4.  Asia's ascent--global trends in biomedical R&D expenditures.

Authors:  Justin Chakma; Gordon H Sun; Jeffrey D Steinberg; Stephen M Sammut; Reshma Jagsi
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2014-01-02       Impact factor: 91.245

5.  Managing conflicts of interest in clinical care: the "race to the middle" at U.S. medical schools.

Authors:  Susan Chimonas; Susanna D Evarts; Sarah K Littlehale; David J Rothman
Journal:  Acad Med       Date:  2013-10       Impact factor: 6.893

6.  Research integrity in China.

Authors:  Wei Yang
Journal:  Science       Date:  2013-11-29       Impact factor: 47.728

7.  China's rise as a major contributor to science and technology.

Authors:  Yu Xie; Chunni Zhang; Qing Lai
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2014-06-16       Impact factor: 11.205

8.  Integrity in Biomedical Research: A Systematic Review of Studies in China.

Authors:  Nannan Yi; Benoit Nemery; Kris Dierickx
Journal:  Sci Eng Ethics       Date:  2018-05-02       Impact factor: 3.525

9.  Research integrity in China: problems and prospects.

Authors:  Weiqin Zeng; David Resnik
Journal:  Dev World Bioeth       Date:  2010-12       Impact factor: 2.294

10.  Survey on the function, structure and operation of hospital ethics committees in Shanghai.

Authors:  P Zhou; D Xue; T Wang; Z L Tang; S K Zhang; J P Wang; P P Mao; Y Q Xi; R Wu; R Shi
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  2009-08       Impact factor: 2.903

View more
  1 in total

1.  Do biomedical researchers differ in their perceptions of plagiarism across Europe? Findings from an online survey among leading universities.

Authors:  Nannan Yi; Benoit Nemery; Kris Dierickx
Journal:  BMC Med Ethics       Date:  2022-08-08       Impact factor: 2.834

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.