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
W
Indem die Teilnehmenden darüber nachdenken, welche moralischen Eigenschaften für Wissenschaftler:innen wichtig sind und inwiefern diese Eigenschaften das Handeln leiten sollten, lernen sie ihre eigenen persönlichen Motive für das wissenschaftliche Arbeiten kennen. +
Well-performed investigations are essential to prevent research misconduct and its negative consequences. As noted in the article, current misconduct investigations mostly focus on the question of whether any scientific misconduct has occurred, rather than the correctness of the literature that has followed from it. However, the negative consequences for patients and general practitioners are mostly caused by the publications that follow from the research. This literature can be incorrect, even if no real misconduct has been established, leading to potential harm for patients. Therefore, the researchers in the present case argue that research misconduct investigations should aim to preserve the integrity of the literature, rather than to establish whether misconduct has taken place or not. +
It shows that a combination of gender bias and citation bias could result in the publication of inaccurate and disrespectful papers. It also shows what can be achieved with post-publication peer-review and concerted efforts of responsible scientists. +
Whether it is purposeful attempt to deceit and knowingly one manipulates data, images, results, or, corrections in publications are the outcome of honest mistakes, this blog raises the editors' dilemma in accepting new submission by these authors. An interesting example for discussion mainly for those involved in publishing. +
Retraction notices are a high-stakes academic genre, and play a key role in maintaining the perception of science as rigorous and truthful. To help minimise the effects of "rotten apple" stakeholders who might game the academic publication system, retraction notices should be made as effective as possible. +
As sociologists want to study the normal behavior of individuals and groups of individuals, it is understandable that they do not want their subjects to know that they are being studied. However, research subjects have the right to know that they are studied, how they are studied and why they are studied to avoid exploitation. Therefore, research subjects must give informed consent before enrolling in a study. As noted in this case, the researcher may seek a waiver of such informed consent from research ethics committees in exceptional cases. +
Working with Research Integrity - Guidance for Research Performing Organisations: The Bonn PRINTEGER Statement +
This document emphasises that responsibility for ethical research lies with everyone who is active in research, but especially with leaders in research performing organisations. Researchers’ morals alone cannot ensure research integrity;good conditions for exercising integrity must also be created at the level of the organisation and the research system. +
X
This policy brief is important because it translates abstract ethical values into actionable norms and standards that can be integrated into AI and XR regulation, moving beyond generic principles that are hard to implement. By identifying emerging ethical risks such as manipulation, privacy invasions, and loss of human agency it provides policymakers with concrete recommendations to make future AI governance more effective and socially responsible. The brief’s operational focus strengthens the EU’s ongoing efforts to regulate AI technologies in ways that protect user rights and foster trustworthy innovation. +
Y
Even in exceptional and unprecedented times like a pandemic it is imperative that all stages of research are followed in a manner dictated by relevant research ethics protocols. +
Even in exceptional and unprecedented times like a pandemic it is imperative that all stages of research are followed in a manner dictated by relevant research ethics protocols. +
Even in exceptional and unprecedented times like a pandemic it is imperative that all stages of research are followed in a manner dictated by relevant research ethics protocols. +
[
The practice of research involves balancing different needs. On the one hand, there is a need for knowledge and innovation which drives research. On the other hand, this must be weighed against the potential harms to research participants and to society at large. Thus, while performing research, it is important to have an understanding of not only the technical aspects, but also the underlying moral tensions, values and principles. These principles underlie various activities such as grant applications, conducting research, collaborations, publishing, mentoring other researchers and committee work. In addition, the document also discusses what constitutes research misconduct and how to prevent it. +
Human digital twins rely on the continuous collection and integration of large volumes of highly sensitive personal data. This creates significant concerns regarding data security, confidentiality, and the potential misuse of health information (1). Unlike traditional medical records, digital twins may contain highly detailed representations of an individual's health status and future disease risks (1,3).
Another challenge concerns informed consent. Participants may consent to the use of their current data, but future applications of digital twin technologies may be difficult to predict. Researchers must therefore consider whether consent remains valid when new analytical methods or purposes emerge (1).
Questions of responsibility and accountability are equally important. If a treatment decision is influenced by a digital twin prediction that later proves incorrect, it may be unclear whether responsibility lies with clinicians, researchers, software developers, or healthcare institutions (1,4).<div></div> +
Scientific research is often done in a team, hence, one must be prepared to collaborate with others. Every researcher must know their role and what is expected of them before they begin their research, in order to avoid conflict. Having a list of principles that every scientist must follow throughout their research ensures that there won’t be any clashes or misunderstandings in the resulting works. All research components should be in sync and make sense when merged together in the final results. +
Cross-boundary collaborations provide opportunities but also difficulties. It is important to be aware of differences in research practice, guidelines and legislation. Collaborators should try to reach consensus and agreement in the design and implementation of research. +
Collaborations between high-income countries (HICs) and low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) can be mutually beneficial endeavors. Researchers from HIC might benefit from local expertise and experience and gain access to unique resources, environments and participants. Researchers from LMICs potentially benefit from access to funding, international networks and opportunities for local capacity building. Collaborations can also, unfortunately, lead to negative experiences, ranging from different standards in data management and ethics applications to a lack of participation in research agenda setting and even coercive recruitment practices or exploitation of people/samples/resources. +
Confidentiality is grounded in the prima facie duty of researchers and health professionals not to reveal information entrusted to them by participants or patients without their permission. It arises from an implicit or explicit agreement to safeguard confidential or secret information and is central to maintaining trust in the researcher–participant and patient–physician relationship. Confidentiality is more specific than privacy: while privacy concerns a person’s general interest in controlling access to themselves and their data, confidentiality refers to the obligation of those who receive information to keep it from unauthorized disclosure. In research, strong promises of confidentiality are often essential to recruit participants, especially when topics are sensitive or potentially stigmatizing. Breaches of confidentiality can cause direct harm to participants, damage trust in researchers and institutions, and undermine public confidence in research. +
Since children are considered vulnerable population, it is important that parental consent is obtained for research. That consent ensures understanding of purpose, procedures and potential risks/benefits of the study, while children's assent respects their autonomy. +
Peer review process is vital to science, as it provides quality assurance before publication of new knowledge. Any situation which can compromise peer review process by influencing decision making should hence be reported, and prevented.'"`UNIQ--ref-00000008-QINU`"'
'"`UNIQ--references-00000009-QINU`"' +
COI is a core concept in research integrity. It can even be argued that most research integrity issues are in some way related to underlying COIs, especially if integrity is understood to refer to doing what is right even if confronted by countervailing incentives.<sup>[2]</sup> Authorship conflicts, for example, often occur because researchers have a strong secondary interest to be listed as authors on as many papers as possible to advance their career, even if they have not contributed to a paper (or if their contribution does not constitute authorship). Usually, discussions on COIs in the research integrity literature focus on the narrower aspect of how COIs can bias research results and thus decrease the reliability of research results, however. In line with most of the relevant literature, this theme page adopts a narrow perspective on COIs.
In addition to their potential effects on research integrity, COIs have an important research ethics dimension as well, especially in biomedical research.<sup>[3]</sup> An example is the specific role of medical doctors in clinical research: According to the International Code of Medical Ethics, they are obliged to “be dedicated to providing competent medical service in full professional and moral independence, with compassion and respect for human dignity”.<sup>[4]</sup> However, if they act as researchers in clinical research, they are confronted with two potentially conflicting interests: a duty to care (primary duty) and the responsibility to generate new knowledge (which in this case is a secondary interest that can under certain circumstances conflict with the duty to care).<sup>[5]</sup>
Therefore, it is crucial to understand what COIs are, how they affect research integrity and research ethics, and what the research community as well as individual researchers can do to minimize their potential detrimental effects. +
