Why is this important? (Important Because)
From The Embassy of Good Science
A description to provide more focus to the theme/resource (max. 200 words)
- ⧼SA Foundation Data Type⧽: Text
S
Many kinds of authorship related disputes exist, from clear breaches of integrity such as omission of authorship to gray areas such as disagreements on the order of attribution. In light of the rapid rise in the number of publications, such conflicts are also on the rise. Many such gray areas have not been previously addressed - neither by ethical guidelines nor by legislation. This guideline builds on an analysis of previous authorship related guidance and sets forth newer recommendations concerning authorship criteria, disputes and their management. +
Swiss Academy of Arts and Sciences Code of Conduct for Scientific Integrity distils national expectations for research integrity in Switzerland and clarifies what researchers and institutions in Switzerland need to do to comply. It reduces ambiguity, aligns local practice with international norms, and offers actionable steps that improve transparency, reproducibility, and equitable access. For policy leads, it is a benchmark;for authors and administrators, it is a practical checklist. Published by Aebi-Müller Regina E., University of Lucerne, Swiss National Science Foundation;Blatter Inge, Swiss National Science Foundation;Brigger Joël, Innosuisse;Constable Edwin Charles, University of Basel, Swiss Academies of Arts and Sciences;Eglin Noëmi, swissuniversities;Hoffmeyer Pierre, University of Geneva, Swiss Academies of Arts and Sciences;Lautenschütz Claudia, Swiss National Science Foundation;Lienhard Andreas, University of Bern, swissuniversities;Pirinoli Christine, HES-SO University of Applied Sciences and Arts, Western Switzerland, swissuniversities;Röthlisberger Markus, Swiss National Science Foundation;Spycher Karin M., Swiss Academies of Arts and Sciences ( in 2021, it is a credible reference to cite in institutional policies, training, and grant documentation. +
Recognizing that the scientific landscape has undergone rapid changes in the last decade, and that scientific integrity is more essential than ever, the Swiss Academy of Arts and Sciences have revised their earlier code of conduct published in 2008. The current guideline takes into account newer challenges in research integrity, with regards to technological advancements, broader collaborations and public-private partnerships. +
T
Checking tabs functionality +
Tesing +
'THE CONCORDAT TO SUPPORT RESEARCH INTEGRITY' is important because it ensures credibility and trust in research by providing both preventive and corrective guidance. It prevents misconduct by educating researchers on standards, and offers frameworks for addressing violations fairly. In today’s interconnected research environment, having shared ethical codes strengthens international collaboration and consistency. For governments, institutions, and the public, this document demonstrates commitment to transparency, fairness, and societal responsibility. It is not just a guideline but a foundation for safeguarding the reliability of research outcomes. +
THE MALAYSIAN CODE OF RESPONSIBLE CONDUCT IN RESEARCH distils national expectations for research integrity in Malaysia and clarifies what researchers and institutions in Malaysia need to do to comply. It reduces ambiguity, aligns local practice with international norms, and offers actionable steps that improve transparency, reproducibility, and equitable access. For policy leads, it is a benchmark;for authors and administrators, it is a practical checklist. Published by nan in 2020, it is a credible reference to cite in institutional policies, training, and grant documentation. +
THE MALAYSIAN CODE OF RESPONSIBLE CONDUCT IN RESEARCH' is important because it ensures credibility and trust in research by providing both preventive and corrective guidance. It prevents misconduct by educating researchers on standards, and offers frameworks for addressing violations fairly. In today’s interconnected research environment, having shared ethical codes strengthens international collaboration and consistency. For governments, institutions, and the public, this document demonstrates commitment to transparency, fairness, and societal responsibility. It is not just a guideline but a foundation for safeguarding the reliability of research outcomes. +
THE SAN CODE OF RESEARCH ETHICS distils international expectations for research integrity in San and clarifies what researchers and institutions in To all who inted to do research in the San communities need to do to comply. It reduces ambiguity, aligns local practice with international norms, and offers actionable steps that improve transparency, reproducibility, and equitable access. For policy leads, it is a benchmark;for authors and administrators, it is a practical checklist. Published by nan in 2017, it is a credible reference to cite in institutional policies, training, and grant documentation. +
This report is important because it challenges the idea that trust in public regulation is simply declining. It shows that effective governance depends not on blind trust, but on balanced “watchful trust” supported by accountability, participation, and communication. These findings matter for improving public confidence, regulatory performance, crisis response, and stakeholder inclusion. It also offers practical recommendations for regulators and affected groups to strengthen legitimacy and compliance in democratic systems. +
Taiwan Code of Conduct for Research Integrity' is important because it ensures credibility and trust in research by providing both preventive and corrective guidance. It prevents misconduct by educating researchers on standards, and offers frameworks for addressing violations fairly. In today’s interconnected research environment, having shared ethical codes strengthens international collaboration and consistency. For governments, institutions, and the public, this document demonstrates commitment to transparency, fairness, and societal responsibility. It is not just a guideline but a foundation for safeguarding the reliability of research outcomes. +
Taiwan Junior Code of Conduct for Research Integrity distils national expectations for research integrity in Taiwan and clarifies what researchers and institutions in Taiwan need to do to comply. It reduces ambiguity, aligns local practice with international norms, and offers actionable steps that improve transparency, reproducibility, and equitable access. For policy leads, it is a benchmark;for authors and administrators, it is a practical checklist. Published by Chien Chou in ?, it is a credible reference to cite in institutional policies, training, and grant documentation. +
Taiwan Junior Code of Conduct for Research Integrity' is important because it ensures credibility and trust in research by providing both preventive and corrective guidance. It prevents misconduct by educating researchers on standards, and offers frameworks for addressing violations fairly. In today’s interconnected research environment, having shared ethical codes strengthens international collaboration and consistency. For governments, institutions, and the public, this document demonstrates commitment to transparency, fairness, and societal responsibility. It is not just a guideline but a foundation for safeguarding the reliability of research outcomes. +
Te Ara Tika Guidelines for Māori research ethics: A framework for researchers and ethics committee members New Zealand, 2010 +
Te Ara Tika Guidelines for Māori research ethics: A framework for researchers and ethics committee members ' is important because it ensures credibility and trust in research by providing both preventive and corrective guidance. It prevents misconduct by educating researchers on standards, and offers frameworks for addressing violations fairly. In today’s interconnected research environment, having shared ethical codes strengthens international collaboration and consistency. For governments, institutions, and the public, this document demonstrates commitment to transparency, fairness, and societal responsibility. It is not just a guideline but a foundation for safeguarding the reliability of research outcomes. +
Te Ara Tika: Guidelines for Māori research ethics: A framework for researchers and ethics committee members +
Te Ara Tika: Guidelines for Māori research ethics: A framework for researchers and ethics committee members distils national expectations for research integrity in New Zealand and clarifies what researchers and institutions in nan need to do to comply. It reduces ambiguity, aligns local practice with international norms, and offers actionable steps that improve transparency, reproducibility, and equitable access. For policy leads, it is a benchmark;for authors and administrators, it is a practical checklist. Published by nan in , it is a credible reference to cite in institutional policies, training, and grant documentation. +
The rapid development of the field of bioethics warrants a novel educational approach to teaching bioethics. The partners of the project believe "that bioethical values and critical thinking are crucial elements, now more than ever, of the development of a democratic, pluralistic, ecologically aware and open society." +
This brief is important because it underscores that technology access and digital literacy are prerequisites for inclusive citizen science and democratic engagement. Without addressing these factors, many people may be excluded from participation simply because they lack devices, connectivity, or the skills to use digital tools confidently. Improving digital literacy empowers individuals to participate actively in data-driven initiatives, strengthens science-community interactions, and helps democratise science. By emphasising both availability of technology and skill development, the recommendations support equitable engagement, reduce digital divides, and enhance the societal impact of citizen science and deliberative governance efforts. +
Particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic, telemedicine has expanded quickly and is now a vital way to provide treatment when in-person visits are not practical (2). But it brings up important issues for researchers: How can digital platforms safeguard confidentiality and privacy? Do online consultations work as well as in-person care? Do all patients have equitable access to telemedicine technologies, particularly those in underserved communities? Furthermore, there is a chance of data breaches and misuse when patient data is gathered and stored on telemedicine platforms. These difficulties force researchers to use exacting techniques to evaluate the safety, effectiveness, and equity of telemedicine systems. Telemedicine may unintentionally increase healthcare inequities or erode public confidence in the healthcare system if these problems are not resolved (3). +
The case, brought by Retraction Watch, is important as it signifies that all stages of research are important, and editors and publishers are nonetheless part of it. +
This article presents short cases about publication ethics that can be used in training sessions and to teach research ethics and integrity to researchers. +
