Search results

Non-disclosure of changes to the research design
four World Conferences on Research Integrity. Research Integrity and Peer Review, 1(1), 17. Not disclosing changes creates a biased view of the research

3 KB (407 words) - 22:54, 27 October 2020
CRISPR twins – an unethical practice
protect newborns against HIV infection. This scientific paper was sent to a peer-review process, during which unethical statements were established. This work

3 KB (418 words) - 00:42, 9 March 2022
Fostering Integrity in Research
research practice Data management Mentor/trainee relationship Authorship Peer review Research with Humans Research with Animals Safety Conflict of interest

2 KB (232 words) - 16:24, 21 October 2020
Methods to increase data availability
research studies impedes the filtering of research findings, aggravates peer-review process and increases the possibility of false study reports. Having in

4 KB (589 words) - 00:24, 1 March 2023
The Hong Kong Principles for assessing researchers: Fostering research integrity
contributions to responsible research and scholarly activity, such as peer review for grants and publications, mentoring, outreach, and knowledge exchange

4 KB (424 words) - 15:26, 22 October 2021
Retractions: correcting the scientific literature (section Dubious Peer Reviews Lead to 10 Retractions)
Edit EditView sourceHistory Find out Themes Retraction is the process of withdrawal from publication of those articles that display seriously flawed or

7 KB (880 words) - 11:18, 18 August 2021
AllTrials campaign
publishing: the new norm? Prospective registration of clinical trials Open peer review - transparent way of gatekeeping science Reliability Accountability Honesty

4 KB (531 words) - 16:52, 25 March 2021
Intellectual conflicts of interest
2020 Conflict of interests Conflict of interest in peer review Conflicts of interest in the review of grant proposals Intellectual property rights in research

7 KB (986 words) - 12:03, 22 October 2020
FAIR principles: sharing data for maximisation of results
About Education Open About Open access publishing: the new norm? Open peer review - transparent way of gatekeeping science Honesty Transparency Data Management

6 KB (873 words) - 14:17, 22 October 2021
Replicability
Edward Diener John Ioannidis Reliability Accountability Transparency Peer Review Pre-registrations Collaborative research Data Management SH - Social Sciences

7 KB (1,058 words) - 12:17, 21 October 2020
Research Integrity and Research Ethics Scenarios for Teaching (section Reviewing, Evaluating, Editing and Research Integrity: An Educational Scenario by the EnTIRE project)
Misconduct Investigations Monitoring research P-Hacking P-value Hacking Peer Review Plagiarism Pre-registrations Privacy Publication Ethics Questionable research

6 KB (646 words) - 15:24, 22 October 2021
ENERI Classroom (section Reviewing, Evaluating, Editing and Research Integrity: An Educational Scenario by the EnTIRE project)
integrity principles Violations of research integrity Plagiarism Authorship Peer review Dealing with violations and allegations of misconduct Whistleblowing and

5 KB (674 words) - 11:37, 17 July 2023
DOAB
directory is open to all publishers of academic, peer reviewed books in Open Access. ResearchersStudentsPublishersPeer reviewers Doab foundation The Netherlands

562 bytes (59 words) - 12:24, 27 November 2020
Multiple submission
to submit the same manuscript to journal#2. Manuscript processing and peer reviewing timelines may vary among journals. Waiting for a journal’s decision

1 KB (134 words) - 19:02, 26 February 2021
Research Integrity and Conflicts of Interest: The Case of Unethical Research-Misconduct Charges
that could affect research misconduct allegations. Rather than using peer-reviewed, scientific-journal literature to try to defend his account of hormesis

2 KB (184 words) - 16:11, 26 October 2020
Is there a reproducibility crisis in science?
innability to reproduce or replicate results that have been reported in peer-reviewed scientific publications, by other than the original writters researchers

1 KB (136 words) - 11:42, 28 October 2020
Journalist who fabricated his reports
of his article in the Harpers magazine. It shows that it is not only peer-reviewed journal publications that should accurately uphold norms of academic

1 KB (96 words) - 19:03, 8 December 2020
Research Integrity in trying times: a scenario on the presentation and dissemination of information
Scenarios Open About Communicate results to the general public before a peer reviewed publication is available Consent for publication (Author) Retractions:

2 KB (116 words) - 10:52, 27 October 2021
Clarifying the aims of a research study
Analysis and Reporting Communicate results to the general public before a peer reviewed publication is available Publication bias (positive results) Outcome

2 KB (306 words) - 10:16, 11 August 2022
Theme:A22bd155-7f88-4750-aa9c-cba9ad72cbec
not considered to be proper publications, because they are usually not peer reviewed. Increasingly, authors post their work first in a preprint server (online

4 KB (553 words) - 17:43, 26 March 2021
Industry funded research
researchers and the food industry? Systematic scoping review of peer‐reviewed and grey literature. Obesity Reviews, 20(8), 1073-1084. The Embassy Editorial team

6 KB (757 words) - 15:03, 13 October 2020
Criticism Swirls Around High-Profile History Book about North Korea
topic and supporting ones claims on scientific evidence which has been peer reviewed by other researchers. Reflecting on this case, for instance in a classroom

3 KB (476 words) - 09:45, 21 September 2021
Sponsorship of drug and device studies by the manufacturing company
population health researchers and the food industry? Systematic scoping review of peer-reviewed and grey literature. Obes Rev 2019; 20: 1073–1084. Wallach JD, Boyack

5 KB (632 words) - 23:50, 28 February 2022
Open access Publication in the European Research Area for Social Sciences and Humanities (OPERAS)
open access publications that meet minimal quality criteria regarding peer-reviewing and licensing. -Metrics service, developed by one of the OPERAS projects

5 KB (650 words) - 10:06, 19 October 2021
Funding (Sponsorship) bias
outcome and quality: systematic review. BMJ. 2003;326(7400):1167-1170. ResearchersResearch institutionsPhD studentsPeer reviewersJournal editorsPublishersFunding

7 KB (1,013 words) - 13:23, 9 February 2023
Bulgaria
E%20CU%20Survey%20Bulgaria%20Exec%20Summary.pdf European Commission. Peer Review of the Bulgarian Research and Innovation system. Horizon 2020 Policy Support

30 KB (1,712 words) - 18:53, 24 October 2021
The European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity - 2017 Edition
organisationsClinical researchersEarly career researchersEthics committee membersJournalsPeer-reviewersPolicy-makersResearch Integrity OfficersResearch institutionsResearch

2 KB (228 words) - 12:28, 10 April 2024
SPOC: Data in responsible conduct of research
also study the principles and considerations that are important in ethics review, respond to statements about the ethics of data collection, read articles

3 KB (364 words) - 16:57, 21 September 2022
Responsible mentoring
advising, counselling, supervising, sponsoring, role-modelling, preceptoring, peer support. Mentoring is a complex phenomenon, which integrates different functions

6 KB (867 words) - 12:01, 20 September 2021
Questionable research practices & research misbehaviors
Fanelli D. How many scientists fabricate and falsify research? A systematic review and meta-analysis of survey data. PloS one 2009;4(5):e5738. Swazey JP, Anderson

5 KB (632 words) - 14:42, 20 March 2022
Luxembourg
Research Integrity (LARI). LARI Peer Coaching. [cited 2021 July 7]. Available from: https://lari.lu/lari-services/lari-peer-coaching/ University of Luxembourg

21 KB (2,033 words) - 20:42, 21 January 2022
Avoiding bias in qualitative data analysis
participants review your results; 3. Verify with more data sources; 4. Check for alternative explanations; 5. Review findings with peers. ResearchersPhD

654 bytes (59 words) - 10:27, 21 April 2021
New claim to authorship of published paper
journal received a submission from author A with co-authors B, C and D. After review and revision it was published in mid-2012. In April 2013 we received a complaint

773 bytes (105 words) - 14:53, 24 November 2021
Manuscript Guidelines Journals
used - to avoid fake reviews, only referees with institutional addresses will be taken into consideration. ResearchersJournal editorsPeer reviewersEducators

878 bytes (92 words) - 14:31, 25 August 2021
Hypothesizing after the results are known (HARKing)
Hypothesizing After the Results are Known. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 2(3), 196-217. doi:10.1207/s15327957pspr0203_4 [2] Hitchcock, C., & Sober

11 KB (1,637 words) - 12:08, 19 May 2022
Forensic Statistics to detect Data Fabrication
of Research Misconduct During Oversight Review. Sci Eng Ethics.2010;16:713-765. Altman DG. Statistical reviewing for medical journals. Stat Med.1998;17:2661-2674

6 KB (855 words) - 22:36, 24 October 2020
The European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity
researchersEarly career researchersEthics committee membersJournalsPolicy-makersPeer-reviewersPharma IndustryResearch Integrity OfficersResearch integrity trainersResearch

2 KB (186 words) - 12:33, 29 June 2021
Dilemmas in daily practice
Scientific Psychology 29 (2007). McGrath, April. "Dealing with dissonance: A review of cognitive dissonance reduction." Social and Personality Psychology Compass

7 KB (710 words) - 09:58, 28 September 2021