Difference between revisions of "Resource:A5e7428e-3972-40b6-b410-cfde15e088d2"
From The Embassy of Good Science
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
|Resource Type=Cases | |Resource Type=Cases | ||
|Title=Misrepresenting the characteristics of research participants in psychiatric studies | |Title=Misrepresenting the characteristics of research participants in psychiatric studies | ||
| − | |Is About=This factual case is about various instances of scientific misconduct by a psychiatrist. The scientific misconduct ranges from | + | |Is About=This factual case is about various instances of scientific misconduct by a psychiatrist. The scientific misconduct ranges from stealing research funds from the government for personal use to the fabrication of data. The psychiatrist is now banned from research funding for two years and must correct or retract four of his previously published papers. <br /> |
<references /> | <references /> | ||
| − | |Important Because=Data fabrication in clinical | + | |Important Because=Data fabrication in clinical trials endangers the health of both current participants and future patients that will be treated with the drug if it is ‘proven’ efficacious. In addition, data fabrication lowers public trust in science. Moreover, data fabrication and stealing of funding money for personal use may lead to the waste of precious research funding budgets on unscientific research. |
|Important For=Researchers | |Important For=Researchers | ||
}} | }} | ||
Latest revision as of 17:13, 28 June 2021
ResourcesCases
Misrepresenting the characteristics of research participants in psychiatric studies
What is this about?
This factual case is about various instances of scientific misconduct by a psychiatrist. The scientific misconduct ranges from stealing research funds from the government for personal use to the fabrication of data. The psychiatrist is now banned from research funding for two years and must correct or retract four of his previously published papers.
Why is this important?
Data fabrication in clinical trials endangers the health of both current participants and future patients that will be treated with the drug if it is ‘proven’ efficacious. In addition, data fabrication lowers public trust in science. Moreover, data fabrication and stealing of funding money for personal use may lead to the waste of precious research funding budgets on unscientific research.
