File:Dropdown dots.svg
From The Embassy of Good Science
Revision as of 13:40, 18 March 2020 by 0000-0001-6563-7916 (talk | contribs)
Size of this preview: 138 × 598 pixels. Other resolution: 55 × 240 pixels.
Original file (SVG file, nominally 512 × 2,219 pixels, file size: 301 bytes)
File history
Click on a date/time to view the file as it appeared at that time.
| Date/Time | Thumbnail | Dimensions | User | Comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| current | 13:40, 18 March 2020 | | 512 × 2,219 (301 bytes) | 0000-0001-6563-7916 (talk | contribs) |
You cannot overwrite this file.
File usage
More than 100 pages use this file. The following list shows the first 100 pages that use this file only. A full list is available.
- Open access publishing: the new norm?
- Research Integrity Committees
- FAIR principles: sharing data for maximisation of results
- Informed consent
- Institutional policies and procedures for research misconduct
- Supervision Guidelines
- Moral conflict and moral dilemma
- Reasonable standards for career advancement
- Peer review
- Cross-boundary collaborations
- Research integrity training for PhD students
- Peer review card game
- Gender bias
- Retractions: correcting the scientific literature
- Virtues in research integrity
- Privacy in research
- Prospective registration of clinical trials
- The impact of the GDPR on scientific data
- Dialogue versus debate
- Initiatives promoting research integrity
- Discipline specific codes and guidelines on research integrity
- Science policy
- Collaborative working
- H-index
- Journal Impact Factor
- Standards of authorship
- Research metrics
- High income and low- and middle-income country collaborations
- Research Integrity Advisors
- Post-publication peer review
- Funders
- Research ethics committees
- Research ethics committee members' skills
- Publishers - COPE guidelines
- Confidentiality
- Responsible supervision
- Epistemic virtues
- Legal rights of accused scientists
- Values and norms
- Altmetrics
- Supervision
- Authorship criteria
- Research integrity officers in Europe
- Cognitive dissonance and moral distress
- Vulnerable and non-competent subjects in clinical trials
- Research with humans
- Research with animals
- Research integrity in practice: dealing with everyday dilemmas
- Balancing harms and benefits
- Open peer review - transparent way of gatekeeping science
- Informed assent
- Whistleblower protection/rights
- Faulty Drug Trials Tarnish Japan's Clinical Research
- Norwegian National Research Ethics Committees - General Guidelines for Research Ethics
- French National Charter for Research Integrity
- The Aftermath of Scientific Fraud
- Researcher Accused of Breaching Research Ethics Faces GMC
- Netherlands Code of Conduct for Research Integrity
- The Saga of Korean Women Who Provided Eggs for Embryonic Stem Cell Research
- The Extent and Causes of Academic Text Recycling or ‘Self-Plagiarism’
- Bioethicists Call for Investigation Into Nutritional Experiments on Aboriginal People
- Scientist Ousted From Cancer Study Declines to Testify to House Panel
- A Review of the Impact of the TeGenero Trial on the Design, Conduct, and Ethics of FIM Trials
- Spanish National Statement on Scientific Integrity
- The Unfortunate Experiment
- The European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity - 2017 Edition
- Czech Code of Ethics for Researchers
- VIRT2UE train-the-trainer program
- Test
- The Threat to Scientific Integrity in Environmental and Occupational Medicine
- False results, premature infants and the CNEP trial
- Jesse's Intent
- Artificial tracheas and severe research misconduct
- Final Findings of Scientific Misconduct
- Austrian Agency for Research Integrity Guidelines for Good Scientific Practice
- From Case Management to Prevention of Scientific Dishonesty in Denmark
- Simultaneous Submission Leading to Duplicate Publication
- Deception by Research Participants
- The TRUST Code - a Global Code of Conduct for Equitable Research Partnerships
- Legal Liabilities in Research: Early lessons From North America
- Institutional Pathology and the Death of a Mentally Ill Young Man
- Guest Authorship, Mortality Reporting, and Integrity in Rofecoxib Studies
- Scientific Misconduct at an Elite Medical Institute: The Role of Competing Institutional Logics and Fragmented Control
- Misconduct Ruling is Silent on Intent
- Estonian Code of Conduct for Research Integrity
- Handling of Scientific Dishonesty in the Nordic Countries: Early stages in the 1990's
- Danish Code of Conduct for Research Integrity
- How I Was Nearly Duped into 'Authoring' a Fake Paper
- Research fraud on MMR vaccines
- Ethics, Human Rights and HIV Vaccine Trials in Low-Income Settings
- Organised Crime Against the Academic Peer Review System
- Author Misconduct: Not Just the Editors' Responsibility
- Belgian Code of Ethics for Scientific Research
- Finnish Guidance on the Responsible Conduct of Research and Procedures for Handling Allegations of Misconduct
- Baltimore Case - In Brief
- Irish National Policy Statement on Ensuring Research Integrity
- Good Epidemiological Practice Guidelines
- German Research Foundation's Recommendations for Safeguarding Good Scientific Practice
- Mea Culpa: Scientific Misconduct - perspective of a research ethics board chair
- The Olivieri Debacle: Where Were the Heroes of Bioethics?
View more links to this file.
