完善促进科研诚信的制度

L. Mercado-Asis, Ma. Lourdes D Maglinao
{"title":"完善促进科研诚信的制度","authors":"L. Mercado-Asis, Ma. Lourdes D Maglinao","doi":"10.35460/2546-1621.2022-sp05","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Research integrity is manifested thru the use of honest and verifiable research methods with adherence to accepted professional codes. Recently, trustworthiness in research has been challenged by various forms of research misconduct, such as analytical flexibility, data dredging, HARKing (hypothesis after research knowledge), plagiarism, and selective and distorted reporting. Drivers of research misconduct have been identified as institutional--publication incentives to pursue a career, researcher--metric of success is publication volume, and the journal-- more likely to accept papers with positive. The open-access mode propelling the proliferation of predatory journals is causing a dilemma to sound research reporting. Measures were established to curtail research integrity challenges, such as study registration, open data, common reporting standards, a team of rivals, and blind analysis. This report will elaborate and provide insight into what influenced research misconduct, how it can be mitigated, and how to maintain a credible research environment.","PeriodicalId":399180,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medicine, University of Santo Tomas","volume":"8 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Improving Systems to Promote Research Integrity\",\"authors\":\"L. Mercado-Asis, Ma. Lourdes D Maglinao\",\"doi\":\"10.35460/2546-1621.2022-sp05\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Research integrity is manifested thru the use of honest and verifiable research methods with adherence to accepted professional codes. Recently, trustworthiness in research has been challenged by various forms of research misconduct, such as analytical flexibility, data dredging, HARKing (hypothesis after research knowledge), plagiarism, and selective and distorted reporting. Drivers of research misconduct have been identified as institutional--publication incentives to pursue a career, researcher--metric of success is publication volume, and the journal-- more likely to accept papers with positive. The open-access mode propelling the proliferation of predatory journals is causing a dilemma to sound research reporting. Measures were established to curtail research integrity challenges, such as study registration, open data, common reporting standards, a team of rivals, and blind analysis. This report will elaborate and provide insight into what influenced research misconduct, how it can be mitigated, and how to maintain a credible research environment.\",\"PeriodicalId\":399180,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Medicine, University of Santo Tomas\",\"volume\":\"8 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-12-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Medicine, University of Santo Tomas\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.35460/2546-1621.2022-sp05\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Medicine, University of Santo Tomas","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.35460/2546-1621.2022-sp05","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

研究诚信是通过使用诚实和可验证的研究方法,并遵守公认的专业规范来体现的。最近,研究的可信度受到各种形式的研究不端行为的挑战,如分析灵活性、数据疏浚、HARKing(研究知识之后的假设)、抄袭以及选择性和扭曲的报道。研究不端行为的驱动因素被确定为机构——追求事业的发表激励,研究人员——成功的衡量标准是发表量,期刊——更有可能接受积极的论文。开放获取模式推动了掠夺性期刊的激增,这给健全的研究报告带来了困境。制定了一些措施来减少研究诚信方面的挑战,如研究注册、开放数据、共同报告标准、竞争对手团队和盲目分析。本报告将详细阐述并提供影响研究不端行为的因素、如何减轻不端行为以及如何维持可信的研究环境的见解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Improving Systems to Promote Research Integrity
Research integrity is manifested thru the use of honest and verifiable research methods with adherence to accepted professional codes. Recently, trustworthiness in research has been challenged by various forms of research misconduct, such as analytical flexibility, data dredging, HARKing (hypothesis after research knowledge), plagiarism, and selective and distorted reporting. Drivers of research misconduct have been identified as institutional--publication incentives to pursue a career, researcher--metric of success is publication volume, and the journal-- more likely to accept papers with positive. The open-access mode propelling the proliferation of predatory journals is causing a dilemma to sound research reporting. Measures were established to curtail research integrity challenges, such as study registration, open data, common reporting standards, a team of rivals, and blind analysis. This report will elaborate and provide insight into what influenced research misconduct, how it can be mitigated, and how to maintain a credible research environment.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Current Insights into Covid-19 Vaccination Effectiveness of Platelet-Rich Plasma as an Adjunct to Core Decompression to Treatment Outcomes and Femoral Head Preservation in Avascular Necrosis of the Hip: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials Clinical and Patient Reported Outcomes of Vitamin E Diffused Highly Cross-Linked Polyethylene Liner Versus Moderately Cross-Linked Polyethylene Liner in Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Meta-Analysis A Review of the Clinical Significance of Lumbar Puncture in the Diagnostic Approach of Aneurysmal Subarachnoid Hemorrhage (SAH): A Case Report of CT-Negative and Lumbar Puncture–Positive SAH A Basic Review of Sarcopenia Diagnosis
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1