Difference between revisions of "Resource:E79b824c-1756-40b9-a0d6-80045febf3b8"
From The Embassy of Good Science
Marc.VanHoof (talk | contribs) |
Marc.VanHoof (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Resource | {{Resource | ||
|Resource Type=Cases | |Resource Type=Cases | ||
| − | |Title=Baltimore | + | |Title=Baltimore Case - In Brief |
| − | |Is About=Three months after a widely leaked draft report by the Office of Scientific Integrity (OSI) within the National Institutes of Health accused Tufts immunologist | + | |Is About=Three months after a widely leaked draft report by the Office of Scientific Integrity (OSI) within the National Institutes of Health accused a Tufts immunologist of fabricating data in a 1986 Cell paper she had co-authored with someone else, the controversy has become, if anything, more intense. An unusual series of published statements in Nature from the principals in the case has catalyzed a bitter debate within the biomedical community. This is a factual case. |
|Important Because=When an article is published, all authors are responsible for what is written in the paper. If the paper contains results of fabricated data, all authors will be kept responsible. | |Important Because=When an article is published, all authors are responsible for what is written in the paper. If the paper contains results of fabricated data, all authors will be kept responsible. | ||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
|Important For=Researchers | |Important For=Researchers | ||
}} | }} | ||
| Line 14: | Line 9: | ||
|Has Link=https://science.sciencemag.org/content/253/5015/24.1.abstract | |Has Link=https://science.sciencemag.org/content/253/5015/24.1.abstract | ||
}} | }} | ||
| − | {{Related To}} | + | {{Related To |
| + | |Related To Theme=Theme:Ab4200ca-c14d-413d-a9f6-aa5a93e1800e | ||
| + | }} | ||
{{Tags | {{Tags | ||
|Involves=Imanishi-Kari | |Involves=Imanishi-Kari | ||
Revision as of 09:08, 26 May 2020
ResourcesCases
Baltimore Case - In Brief
What is this about?
Three months after a widely leaked draft report by the Office of Scientific Integrity (OSI) within the National Institutes of Health accused a Tufts immunologist of fabricating data in a 1986 Cell paper she had co-authored with someone else, the controversy has become, if anything, more intense. An unusual series of published statements in Nature from the principals in the case has catalyzed a bitter debate within the biomedical community. This is a factual case.
Why is this important?
When an article is published, all authors are responsible for what is written in the paper. If the paper contains results of fabricated data, all authors will be kept responsible.
