What is this about? (Is About)
From The Embassy of Good Science
A short summary providing some details about the theme/resource (max. 75 words)
- ⧼SA Foundation Data Type⧽: Text
P
Portuguese National Council of Ethics for the Life Sciences Recommendation on Integrity in Scientific Research +
The Portuguese National Council of Ethics for the Life Sciences developed the Recommendation on Research Integrity both in response to the publication of the European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity, and to provide concrete guidelines for practice in the national setting. The guidance outlines general principles that should be adhered to (reliability, honesty, respect, and responsibility) as well as the actions required to foster good scientific conduct. +
The main goal of the Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) platform is to ensure that advances in research are carried out responsibly- with not only scientific progress in mind, but also the needs and concerns of society. This platform encourages knowledge sharing and transfer, promotes scientific collaboration and disseminates information and research results among the public and other stakeholders. Moreover, they promote the implementation of responsible research practices at various levels, from research institutions to national policy.
In their position paper, the RRI platform elaborates the different aspects of responsible research and provides recommendations as to how it can be implemented. In keeping with the European Commission's definition of RRI, six tenets of RRI are focused upon: public engagement, gender equality, science education, open access, ethics and governance. For each tenet, recommendations are made to strengthen and further develop RRI, with the Austrian context in mind. +
Currently, research in most countries is governed by self-regulation rather than by external regulatory bodies. Over the years, several debates have arisen regarding this model of regulation. There are also wide variations in who oversees self-regulation, based on the the research area and the location of the research. For instance, research involving human subjects is much more tightly regulated than non-human research.
This position paper gives an overview of the different models of research regulation and governance, with special focus on the UK context. This is useful for all stakeholders, but especially for research institutions, to know the extent and limits of self-regulation. +
A state employee who can influence the decision-making proceess around the awarding of private archaeological licences applies for a permit to run a private antiquities firm that might benefit from such licences. +
In 2013, a COPE member journal published a paper describing an observational study comparing two drugs (A and B) for the management of a chronic disease over a period of 10 years. The conclusion in the paper was that mortality was higher in group A (97 deaths) compared with the other group B (52 deaths) (hazard ratio 1.76, 1.22 to 2.53;P=0.003). This analysis was done after adjustment for a large number of confounders, and was approved by our statistical advisor. The authors of the papers did acknowledge that this was an observational study, and did state that residual confounding might be present.
In 2014 COPE received a letter of concern by a researcher, employed by the company selling drug A, who felt that the authors of the 2013 paper omitted essential information that might impact on the conclusions. It appears that the routine management of this disease has changed substantially over the 10 year period, and this should have been treated as a confounder for which statistical adjustments should have been made. This change in routine management of the disease is documented in a paper published in 2014, but the researcher felt that these authors were probably aware of this much earlier and should have disclosed this information during the review process of their 2013 paper.
In our initial response in July 2014 to the letter of concern, we asked the researcher who sent us the letter of concern to send us a detailed rapid response to the 2013 paper, which we could publish. We have also asked advice of our statistical advisor who reviewed the 2013 paper, and he acknowledged that this information might impact on the statistical calculations and thus the conclusions of the paper. But with the data available to him, he is not able to make a definitive assessment of how much impact it would have. He has suggested to put these questions to the authors of the 2013 paper. +
This blog post describes the process that led to the identification of image manipulation in a journal article. At the time of publication, the first author was a postdoc and seemed to have been under pressure to publish. +
A reader contacted the journal to raise concerns about a paper containing a potentially manipulated figure. The editor-in-chief agreed with the assessment that the figure had been manipulated and attempted to contact the corresponding author, without response. Following further contact with the co-authors and institution, it was established that the corresponding author had retired after publication of the paper, and no current contact details could be found.
No co-authors were able to confirm how the figure was constructed, but explained that it was an old image that was made by or for the corresponding author, and that the location of the raw image or original data was not known due to the corresponding author’s laboratory being dismantled on retirement. The figure is also present in a previous publication from 2007. The figure manipulation does not appear to affect the scientific results or conclusions of the paper. +
An anthropological consultancy is hired by two power companies to produce a report on the impact of these companies on the Native American communities who own the land in which the companies plan to operate. The companies ask for the reports to be secret. The Anthropologists have been hired by both the companies but feel moraly obliged to look after the interests of the Native Americans. +
This guide is intended for researchers, research organizations and funding organizations. It is divided into three parts. First part contains six aspects that every Data Management Plan should cover, with detailed guiding questions. Second part contains four topics detailing criteria that every trusted repository should meet. Third part provides detailed information and shares examples to encourage the implementation of the requirements and criteria into an organization’s policies. +
This paper briefly describes the replicability crisis in the field of psychology and suggests some 'practical tools and strategies that researchers can implement to increase replicability and the overall quality of their scientific research'. +
The main goal of the first sessions is to introduce the five exercises which represent the face-to-face/participatory part of the blended learning training and to prepare trainees to practice facilitating the exercises themselves.
By taking part in the sessions trainees:
1) Learn how to reflect on their own practice by using the exercises.
2) Meet the specific learning goals for each exercise.
3) Get an example of how the exercises can be facilitated.
4) Reflect on what would they need to do or learn to be able to facilitate the exercises themselves. +
Join your fellow trainees and your trainers for the first participatory sessions (face to face or though conference call). During these sessions you will reflect upon the content of the online course and integrate the knowledge you have gained in practice while experiencing the group exercises, facilitated by the trainer.
Through the exercises, you will be guided to reflect on your own experiences and develop, in dialogue with others, insight in moral considerations about virtuous responses to (real) moral dilemmas in practice. Furthermore, you will learn how to foster reflection in others by focusing on your role as trainer. You will also learn the didactics of each exercise and how to apply them in your own work setting. +
Pratiquer une recherche intègre et responsable - Conducting Ethical and Responsible Research – Guidelines (2017), CNRS Ethics Committee (62. ChatGPT translated French Code, p. 1) +
Pratiquer une recherche intègre et responsable - Conducting Ethical and Responsible Research – Guidelines (2017) is a national framework authored by CNRS Ethics Committee (62. ChatGPT translated French Code, p. 1), in french, targeting nan. Originating from France, it aims to formalise principles of research integrity and open practice. It emphasises honesty, accountability, professional courtesy, and stewardship of resources, linking these values to reproducibility, credibility, and societal trust in research. The text covers responsibilities of researchers, institutions, funders, and journals, spelling out expectations for good practice in planning, conducting, publishing, and reviewing research. Common provisions include clear authorship criteria, proper citation and acknowledgement, management of conflicts of interest, transparency of methods and data, responsible supervision, and fair peer review. It also establishes procedures for handling breaches of integrity, defining misconduct, and setting up investigation mechanisms that ensure due process, proportional sanctions, and learning opportunities. By aligning with international standards, it connects local policy to global norms, reinforcing mobility of researchers and comparability of practices across borders. The document integrates the principle of education—training for students and staff on responsible conduct—ensuring that integrity is taught as a core skill rather than assumed knowledge. It also incorporates guidance on emerging issues such as data management, digital tools, open science, and new forms of dissemination, embedding integrity in contemporary workflows. Practical tools often include checklists, codes of behaviour, reporting templates, and FAQs, translating high-level principles into day-to-day actions. The intended audience spans researchers, supervisors, institutions, and policymakers, all of whom need clarity on their roles in safeguarding the credibility of research. Equity and diversity appear as cross-cutting themes, recognising that integrity involves creating inclusive environments free from discrimination, harassment, or exploitation. Overall, the resource situates research integrity as both a personal commitment and an institutional responsibility, embedding it into the full research cycle from design to dissemination. Annexes may provide case studies, historical context, and references to international declarations such as Singapore or Montreal statements. Definitions and glossaries support consistent interpretation, and contact points or ombudsperson systems are described to lower barriers to reporting. These features help the resource serve not only as a policy but also as a practical handbook.
Precision medicine, or personalized medicine, aims to prevent, diagnose, and treat the patient, taking into account their genetic and clinical picture. At the very heart of precision medicine is genetic testing as a diagnostic tool. The analysis of genome variants enables the detection of hereditary predispositions to diseases such as breast and colon cancer. In addition to oncology, precision medicine can also be used to treat rare diseases, various neurological conditions, and cardiovascular diseases.(1) +
This blog post describes a controversy that involved an industrial partner eager to report the results of an ongoing clinical trial based on analysing the first 25% of data. +
The assignments in preparation for the face-to- face training provide a basic understanding of the concepts used in the course (such as research integrity virtues, values, norms, moral dilemma and moral conflict) and prepare you for the exercises you are going to experience in the face to face sessions. +
Preparing raw clinical data for publication: guidance for journal editors, authors, and peer reviewers +
This article is intended for authors, journal editors and peer reviewers and provides guidance on how to prepare for sharing of raw data. The authors propose "a minimum standard" that would ensure patient privacy when sharing clinical research data. +
This study provides information about the role of the Research Integrity Officer (RIO) in preparing whistleblowers to report the case of research misconduct. The authors concluded that RIOs who fully inform whistleblowers help them make a more informed decision about reporting and reduce their stress. +
Preprint servers are open access online archives or repositories that contain research papers before their peer review and publication.'"`UNIQ--ref-00000000-QINU`"''"`UNIQ--ref-00000001-QINU`"' Their main aim is to accelerate dissemination process of research findings and enhance their visibility.
'"`UNIQ--references-00000002-QINU`"' +
This webpage lists benefits of posting papers on preprint servers and offers some practical tips to authors. It contains Quick Submission Checklist, Background Requirements and pointers on how to prepare the article for a preprint server. +
