Search by property

This page provides a simple browsing interface for finding entities described by a property and a named value. Other available search interfaces include the page property search, and the ask query builder.

List of results

Ethics of ageing + (Recent advances in research allow for a mo … Recent advances in research allow for a more defined view of the ethical issues surrounding the treatment of aging. Today we know that the senescence of the organism is a pathological process with a great variety of pathological consequences in old age (which causes or aggravates cardiovascular disease, cancer, neurodegenerative diseases and many others). It has also been shown that in laboratory animals it is possible to slow down aging, prolong healthy adulthood and reduce the age incidence of a broad spectrum of aging-related diseases. This is accompanied by an overall extension of the life span, sometimes to a great extent. Ethics discussions in this area argue how the treatment of aging can have detrimental consequences on society as a whole.Anyway, given the developments in research in the treatment of diseases linked to aging, it would be useful to define how these interventions must be applied without ethically compromising the meaning of existence as a society, devaluing life by extending its duration'"`UNIQ--ref-000004CE-QINU`"' . In conclusion, decelerated aging leads to conflicting decisions. The health benefits force us to pursue it, despite the change in some ethical aspects of human society will be inevitable.pects of human society will be inevitable.)
Moral conflict and moral dilemma + (Reflection on moral conflicts, and especia … Reflection on moral conflicts, and especially on moral dilemmas, is an important element of responsible research practice. Take for example Phase I trials that involve novel therapies for patients (so-called First-In-Human (FIH) Trials). '"`UNIQ--ref-00000038-QINU`"' These trials involve a high degree of uncertainty in intervention development and possible outcomes. Although this step, hopefully, in turn, will make a Phase-III clinical trial in compliance with the basic epistemological and ethical requirement of therapeutic trials possible, it is a fact that so far no widely accepted standards for judgments of uncertainty, safety, and value of FIH trials have yet been formulated. Consequently, no selection of patients to be included in such trials can be said to be fully satisfactory, i.e. without the possibility of moral failure. Through acknowledging the possible existence of irresolvable moral conflicts in research, researchers will learn modesty, and thereby also protect themselves from being infected by the vice of ''hybris''.Reflection on moral dilemmas can be fostered by organizing Moral Case Deliberation (MCD). '"`UNIQ--ref-00000039-QINU`"' In MCD, a morally troublesome situation is investigated by a group, guided by a facilitator. During the investigation, the conflicting values in the situation are examined in dialogue. This enables participants to become aware of, and reflect on the moral conflict involved. MCD specifically focuses on moral conflicts that cannot be restlessly solved, that is on moral dilemmas. The aim is to investigate different values of stakeholders in practice, and become aware that in making a choice, certain values will be harmed. This may result in the awareness that, although a choice is unavoidable, one should be open to the negative consequences of and take responsibility for them.'"`UNIQ--references-0000003A-QINU`"'them. '"`UNIQ--references-0000003A-QINU`"')
Insufficiently reported study flaws and limitations + (Regardless of the importance and necessity … Regardless of the importance and necessity to fully report study limitations, in practice researchers still need to be encouraged to report their limitations and to describe them properly and thoroughly. The following example demonstrates that scientists in medicine do not fully discuss and present limitations of their research '"`UNIQ--ref-00000463-QINU`"'. A study was conducted on 400 articles published in 2005 in journals with the highest number of citations, among them two open-access journals. Full-texts of these articles were electronically searched, looking for words ‘limitation’, ‘caveat’ or ‘caution’. The results showed that only 67 articles (17%) used at least one of the mentioned words when presenting their own research. Furthermore, only four articles (1%) used the word ‘limitation’ in their abstract, while not one article mentioned limitations of their research that had impact on the conclusions '"`UNIQ--ref-00000464-QINU`"'.Researchers do not present their study limitations because perhaps they do not fully understand the significance, outcomes and implications of these limitations to the study results. Maybe they think that probability for publication of their work would be higher by not addressing them '"`UNIQ--ref-00000465-QINU`"'. Journals also bear great responsibility in this matter because of the word limits that prevent authors from reporting and thoroughly describing their limitations '"`UNIQ--ref-00000466-QINU`"'. When researchers do mention their study limitations, they usually provide only a list, they do not fully describe them '"`UNIQ--ref-00000467-QINU`"'. There are several things researchers and journals can do to responsibly report study flaws and limitations. When describing them, researchers should clearly classify the type of limitation so that readers could interpret the research findings correctly '"`UNIQ--ref-00000468-QINU`"'. They should not only describe the limitations, but also explain their implications. Assessing impact of limitations on conclusions of the research and its validity is also very important and can help to avoid bias. Researchers should explain why they did not take some alternative approaches or maybe provide some alternative explanations of their findings. Finally, researchers should describe efforts taken to mitigate the implications of study limitations '"`UNIQ--ref-00000469-QINU`"'. Journals, on the other hand, should encourage authors to present their study limitations and provide them with some guidelines '"`UNIQ--ref-0000046A-QINU`"'. Reporting study flaws and limitations should enter the everyday research practice. The only way to deal with such uncertainties is to present data, methodology, limitations and study deficiencies transparently so that decision makers can be fully aware of quality and potential errors in inference.'"`UNIQ--references-0000046B-QINU`"'ence. '"`UNIQ--references-0000046B-QINU`"')
A Data Governance Framework for Ethnography + (Regulatory compliance Data archiving and management)
A Case Series in Publication Ethics: Copyright Violation + (Reproducing any part of an article or book … Reproducing any part of an article or book (figure, table, etc) definitely requires permission from the copyright holder. The copyright holder is usually the publisher since authors tend to transfer the copyright to the publisher upon submission of their manuscripts.sher upon submission of their manuscripts.)
Research Integrity Advisors + (Research integrity advisors are experience … Research integrity advisors are experienced researchers with in-depth knowledge of research integrity and research ethics. They are appointed by the university to serve the complex role of dealing with all sort of questions related to research integrity practices, procedures, and issues.For example, in Australia, universities have established research integrity advisors’ teams to assist researchers and research students in conducting research with integrity and advise them on questions that may arise during the research process. If you are not sure who to talk with, the universities web pages contain lists of RIAs and guidance on when to approach to an advisor. '"`UNIQ--ref-00000097-QINU`"' At Melbourne University, RIAs also have a responsibility to report alleged cases of research misconduct to authorized bodies. '"`UNIQ--ref-00000098-QINU`"'In Europe, for example, in Denmark, some Danish research institutions (e.g., Aarhus University) have special advisors for supporting the good scientific practice. '"`UNIQ--ref-00000099-QINU`"' Moreover, LARI (Luxembourg Agency for Research Integrity) provides research ethics consultations to researchers of all levels. While LARI advisors are not officially called RI advisors, they still have a similar role. '"`UNIQ--ref-0000009A-QINU`"''"`UNIQ--references-0000009B-QINU`"'NU`"' '"`UNIQ--references-0000009B-QINU`"')
Conflicts with Community Leaders + (Researchers can consult the following guid … Researchers can consult the following guidelines on collaboration with communities:* Kate Chatfield et al. (2018) Research with, not about, communities - Ethical guidance towards empowerment in collaborative research, a report for the TRUST project. http://trust-project.eu/* Figueiredo Nascimento, S., Cuccillato, E., Schade, S., Guimarães Pereira, A. (2016) Citizen Engagement in Science and Policy-Making. doi:10.2788/40563 https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/communities/sites/jrccties/files/mc10_rio_sio-lopez_mobility_reading.pdfes/mc10_rio_sio-lopez_mobility_reading.pdf)
Ethical issues of involving children with disabilities in research + (Researchers must always consider mitigatio … Researchers must always consider mitigation strategies to overcome challenges that occur when it comes to involving children with disabilities in research and to do it in an ethical and respectful way. For meaningful participation, the individual capacities of each child involved must be considered at all stages of the research cycle, to ensure that processes are suitable for the diverse competencies, knowledge, interests, access, needs and contexts of all children involved.eds and contexts of all children involved.)
Secondary corrections + (Researchers should be up-to-date in their … Researchers should be up-to-date in their field of interest and, when they notice a retraction of an article that they have previously cited, correct the article. The easiest way to be regularly updated on retractions is by following Retraction Watch and their database '"`UNIQ--ref-000004CB-QINU`"'. Zotero citation manager has established a partnership with Retraction Watch and has implemented retraction notifications that pop-up when an article from the users’ database has been retracted. Hopefully other citation managers will follow this practice.An initiative to stimulate this kind of behavior could result in more corrected articles. In practice, taking into account the number of articles that are published every day, it is hard to expect an individual to notice everything. The ideal practice would be that the journal which has retracted the article, notifies authors which have cited the retracted article. However, that is hard to be expected, especially for older articles. Alternately, authors of the retracted article could inform all the authors who have cited their article. This may be expected from authors whose article is retracted due to unintentional mistake and have initiated the retraction, but it might be illusory to expect this from authors who have committed fabrication, plagiarism, or similar misconduct.'"`UNIQ--references-000004CC-QINU`"'duct. '"`UNIQ--references-000004CC-QINU`"')
The impact of the GDPR on scientific data + (Researchers that work with personal data c … Researchers that work with personal data can consult the GDPR online [https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32016R0679 here]. In 2020 the European Data Protection Supervisor issued [https://edps.europa.eu/sites/edp/files/publication/20-01-06_opinion_research_en.pdf A Preliminary Opinion on data protection and scientific research].You should also be able to contact your local Data Protection Officer or study supervisor for more information on handling personal data.ore information on handling personal data.)
Deception by Research Participants + (Resnik et al (2015) list four measures res … Resnik et al (2015) list four measures researchers can take to address deception by research subjects. '"`UNIQ--ref-00000197-QINU`"'# Researchers can verify information by letting participants undergo physical exams and laboratory tests.# Research subjects can be excluded from the study when deception is uncovered.# Studies can consider rewarding research subjects when they provide accurate self-reported information. # Researchers can require subjects to be registered in a clinical trial particpant registry.d in a clinical trial particpant registry.)
The qualification portfolio (UMC Utrecht): from output to impact + (See also: http://www.nature.com/news/fewer-numbers-better-science-1.20858)
Research ethics committees + (Several documents and declarations have be … Several documents and declarations have been developed in relation to ethical research committees. The European Network of Research Ethics Committees - EUREC is a network that brings together existing national Research Ethics Committees, networks or comparable initiatives on the level of European Union. RECs can be established for each academic institution and/or universities. In the United States, Institutional Review boards (IRBs) exist in both academic and state institutions.t in both academic and state institutions.)
Peer Review in the Social Sciences and Humanities + (Shortcomings in the current system have le … Shortcomings in the current system have led to discussions in the SSH community with the aim of addressing the challenges and implementing some changes. In February 2020, the European Network for Research Evaluation in the Social Sciences and the Humanities (ENRESSH) provided a report, an “[https://enressh.eu/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/Hoffman-Holowiecki-Holm-Ochsner-Overview-of-Peer-Review-Practices-in-the-SSH.pdf Overview of Peer Review Practices in the SSH]” '"`UNIQ--ref-000003F3-QINU`"'. The report stressed that, in contrast to STEM, SSH disciplines are more heterogeneous in their publication outputs. This makes it difficult to define and evaluate research methodologies, which, subsequently, leads to a lack of consensus when it comes to the criteria for assessing the quality of research outputs '"`UNIQ--ref-000003F4-QINU`"'. The report states that copying the evaluation models that exist for STEM disciplines is not the best response '"`UNIQ--ref-000003F5-QINU`"'. However, some argue that certain practices, such as open peer review, could apply to SSH. The advantages of open peer review are that it would speed up the publication process and enable dialogue between authors and readers '"`UNIQ--ref-000003F6-QINU`"'.In order to speed up the review process, the report offers other suggestions, including, limiting the length of manuscripts, limiting the number of publications per researcher or institution and recruiting more reviewers '"`UNIQ--ref-000003F7-QINU`"'. In addition, the SSH community could learn from new peer review models in STEM subjects, and seek to apply them if possible '"`UNIQ--ref-000003F8-QINU`"'. Although SSH disciplines are heterogeneous, there is a call for general standards and principles for peer review '"`UNIQ--ref-000003F9-QINU`"', in order to ensure “timeliness, transparency and verifiability” '"`UNIQ--ref-000003FA-QINU`"'. Even though the SSH tend to be slower to respond to calls for change when compared with STEM disciplines, some journals and platforms have been adapting to recent developments in peer review systems, including 1) Kairos, which adopted a three-stage review process '"`UNIQ--ref-000003FB-QINU`"', 2) Palgrave Macmillian, which has trialed open peer review trial '"`UNIQ--ref-000003FC-QINU`"' and open publishing '"`UNIQ--ref-000003FD-QINU`"', and 3) Wellcome Open Research, which provides post-publication peer review '"`UNIQ--ref-000003FE-QINU`"'.'"`UNIQ--references-000003FF-QINU`"'U`"'. '"`UNIQ--references-000003FF-QINU`"')
AllTrials campaign + (Since 2008, the American Food and Drug Adm … Since 2008, the American Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has required that results of all trials have to be posted within one year of their completion. This legislation, like others, does not work retroactively, which means that every treatment tested before 2008 does not have to have published results. Also, since the legislation came into action, no studies have been fined for noncompliance, and research has shown that 80% of clinical trials do not comply.'"`UNIQ--ref-00000082-QINU`"''"`UNIQ--ref-00000083-QINU`"' Major clinical trial registries (clinicaltrials.gov, eudraCT), have independent trials trackers, led by Data Lab from Oxford University. They collect a list of trials that have ended and whether or not they published their results. The Data Lab also collaborated with Goldacre on Open Trials. Its aim is to collect everything related to clinical trials in one place, including their registration, data, reports, publications and researchers.'"`UNIQ--references-00000084-QINU`"'hers. '"`UNIQ--references-00000084-QINU`"')
Vulnerable and non-competent subjects in clinical trials + (Since World War II, a lot has been said ab … Since World War II, a lot has been said about human experimentation, and vulnerable groups in particular. Many different reports and guidelines have been developed and should be consulted when thinking about involving vulnerable and non-competent individuals. Start with the Declaration of Helsinki and don’t forget to check the appropriate regulations of your own country and institution.tions of your own country and institution.)
The Netherlands Code of Conduct for Academic Practice + (Six principles: Honesty and scrupulousness, Reliability, Verifiability, Impartiality, Independence and Responsibility)
Sharing and preserving data in repositories + (Some journals, such as Nature, require dep … Some journals, such as Nature, require depositing data to data repositories as part of the manuscript submission process. This is one of the prerequisites for publication.'"`UNIQ--ref-00000917-QINU`"' Nature has set out certain criteria for data repositories. They should:-provide long-term preservation of data (at least 5 years after publication)-be supported by a research community or institution-provide deposited datasets with stable and persistent identifiers-allow open access-provide terms of data use-facilitate for anonymous reviewers to access data under embargo.'"`UNIQ--ref-00000918-QINU`"' The journal also offers a list of repositories across research areas for researchers who are not certain where to deposit their data:-[https://www.nature.com/sdata/policies/repositories#:~:text=Generalist%20repositories-,Biological%20sciences,-%E2%A4%B4 Biological sciences]-[https://www.nature.com/sdata/policies/repositories#:~:text=Generalist%20repositories-,Biological%20sciences,-%E2%A4%B4 Health sciences]-[https://www.nature.com/sdata/policies/repositories#:~:text=view%20FAIRshaing%20entry-,Chemistry%20and%20Chemical%20biology,-%E2%A4%B4 Chemistry and Chemical biology]-[https://www.nature.com/sdata/policies/repositories#:~:text=view%20FAIRsharing%20entry-,Earth%2C%20Environmental%20and%20Space%20sciences,-%E2%A4%B4 Earth, Environmental and Space sciences]-[https://www.nature.com/sdata/policies/repositories#:~:text=view%20FAIRsharing%20entry-,Physics,-%E2%A4%B4 Physics]-[https://www.nature.com/sdata/policies/repositories#:~:text=view%20re3data%20entry-,Materials%20science,-%E2%A4%B4 Material science]-[https://www.nature.com/sdata/policies/repositories#:~:text=view%20FAIRsharing%20entry-,Social%20sciences,-%E2%A4%B4 Social sciences]-[https://www.nature.com/sdata/policies/repositories#:~:text=view%20re3data%20entry-,Generalist%20repositories,-%E2%A4%B4 Generalist repositories].'"`UNIQ--ref-00000919-QINU`"''"`UNIQ--references-0000091A-QINU`"'NU`"' '"`UNIQ--references-0000091A-QINU`"')
Replicability + (Some of the most common examples of replic … Some of the most common examples of replication failures come from drug discovery and development. Usually drugs are developed in several stages, beginning with cells and animal studies and ultimately advancing to human trials. Failures in both conceptual and direct replication are frequent in this branch of science. Conceptual failure, for example, can occur when testing a drug that has promising action in animals for the first time in humans'"`UNIQ--ref-0000039B-QINU`"''"`UNIQ--ref-0000039C-QINU`"', whereas a direct replication failure might occur when testing the same drug on a similar group of people'"`UNIQ--ref-0000039D-QINU`"'. Since successful replications enhance public trust in science and medicine, the increasing number of non-replicable studies in various disciplines, mainly psychology, have resulted in what has been described as a “replication crisis” and raised serious concerns'"`UNIQ--ref-0000039E-QINU`"'. A study conducted by a team of 270 scientists at the University of Virginia in Charlottesville showed that only 35 of 100 studies published in one of the prominent psychology journals in 2008 could be replicated'"`UNIQ--ref-0000039F-QINU`"'. Some argue however that there is no such thing as a “replication crisis”; moreover, sometimes the “non-replicability” could be helpful to science'"`UNIQ--ref-000003A0-QINU`"'.If replication fails, it does not necessarily mean that the original result of the experiment which is being replicated is false. It indicates some unknown factors are different in the replication experiment vs. the original experiment and an attempt should be made to investigate these '"`UNIQ--ref-000003A1-QINU`"''"`UNIQ--ref-000003A2-QINU`"'. If such factors are found (either of a technical or knowledge domain specific nature) they can substantially improve the understanding of the phenomena being studied.In the last few years, leading scientific institutions in the United States have taken some steps to improve replicability. In 2014, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) provided training modules for postdoctoral fellows and a list of publications regarding replicability on their website, and emphasized addressing transparency in grant applications'"`UNIQ--ref-000003A3-QINU`"'. The National Science Foundation (NSF) and the Institute for Education Sciences (IES) have published Companion Guidelines on Replication and Reproducibility in Education Research in 2018. The guidelines suggest several actions to enhance replicability. For example, proposals for replication studies should guarantee objectivity, pre-registration of the research design and methods should ensure transparency, research should be described in detail, and all research data should be publically available'"`UNIQ--ref-000003A4-QINU`"'. Taking these important steps calls for a significant culture shift so that accuracy in research would be valued more than swiftness'"`UNIQ--ref-000003A5-QINU`"'.'"`UNIQ--references-000003A6-QINU`"'U`"'. '"`UNIQ--references-000003A6-QINU`"')
Seven Ways to Plagiarise: The Magazine Surprise + (Specific advice for authors: "Do not put y … Specific advice for authors: "Do not put your name on a manuscript written by someone else. • Do not insert someone else’s text as a place-holder in a draft manuscript. The original might not be replaced later. • Do not copy verbatim the background section of someone else’s paper. Copying an amount beyond fair use might violate copyright law. The background section could be incomplete or erroneous. A subsequent inquiry or investigation would consume a lot of time from faculty and administrators, and it could embarrass the institution. • Include references to all sources, with appropriate citations, in all manuscripts and grant proposals. • Take allegations of plagiarism to a research integrity officer. If there is no research integrity officer, then consult a knowledgeable administrator"'"`UNIQ--ref-000002CA-QINU`"''"`UNIQ--references-000002CB-QINU`"'NU`"' '"`UNIQ--references-000002CB-QINU`"')
Research with animals + (Starting in the 18th century, more and mor … Starting in the 18th century, more and more arguments against research with animals have been voiced. Today, guidance for ethical use of animals in research is represented by so called 3R principles. 3R stands for replacement, reduction and refinement.'"`UNIQ--ref-000000D6-QINU`"''"`UNIQ--ref-000000D7-QINU`"' Replacement implies that animals as an experimental system should be replaced with a system from which the identical conclusion could be made if it is available. Reduction means that minimal numbers of animals should be used to prove something in experiments. Refinement means that if suffering of animals is present in the experiment it should be refined with pain killing medications and other support measures. In 2013, European Union formally applied EU Directive 2010/63/EU on the protection of animals used for scientific purposes.'"`UNIQ--ref-000000D8-QINU`"'This directive refers to 3R principles, and its ultimate goal is to replace animals in research altogether.'"`UNIQ--references-000000D9-QINU`"'The application of the 3R principles is considered to be of crucial importance for the ethical use of animals in medicine testing across the European Union. Therefore, the European Medicines Agency (EMA) in collaboration with a dedicated 3Rs Working Party (3RsWP) develops scientific guidelines to help medicine developers comply with EU Directive 2010/63/EU. In order to ensure that there are no references to animal tests that are no longer considered appropriate, the EMA reviews and updates EMA guidelines to implement best practice with regard to 3Rs. Additionally, in accordance with Regulatory Science Strategy to 2025, the Agency is promoting 3Rs through a multidisciplinary group - the Innovation Task Force (ITF). This approach is expected to encourage prioritising of alternative methods and facilitate their integration into the development and evaluation of medicinal products.ment and evaluation of medicinal products.)
Online Posts Damage a Researcher's Reputation + (TENK believes that it is important to keep the threshold low for initiating a preliminary inquiry into such cases.)
Good Practice and Reporting Cases in Finland + (TENK launched the Research Integrity Advis … TENK launched the Research Integrity Adviser system in order to raise awareness of the responsible conduct of research in Finland, to increase personal guidance on research integrity, and to offer expert training on responsible conduct of research and procedures.TENK advised various parties on mechanisms to resolve allegations of research misconduct as well the guidelines for handling alleged violations.TENK coordinates the ethical review of research in the field of human sciences and promotes cooperation between regional and institutional research ethics committees. The Board annually monitors the state of ethical review in universities and research institutions by gathering information on the cases handled by research ethics committees.TENK established a working group to update the guidelines for the ethical review of research in the field of human sciences in order to meet the requirements of the new General Data Protection Regulations ('GDPR').eral Data Protection Regulations ('GDPR').)
Ethical Guidelines for Good Research Practice + (The ASA Ethical Guidelines present the responsibilities that researchers have with research participants, funders, sponsors, employers, host governments and the discipline of anthropology in general.)
Inferring from P-values + (The ASA statement on P-values gives instru … The ASA statement on P-values gives instructions on the correct use of P-values, with the goal of improving interpretation in quantitative science. The overall conclusion of the ASA is that scientific inferences should not be based exclusively on P-value threshold, because that, in itself, does not provide substantial evidence regarding a model or hypothesis, nor does it measure the size of a certain effect or determine the importance of the results. Researchers should use P-values within a proper context, because otherwise it can lead to selective reporting '"`UNIQ--ref-0000041F-QINU`"'. Good scientific inference requires the full and transparent reporting of data and methods '"`UNIQ--ref-00000420-QINU`"'. There are other methods that researchers can use with or instead of P-values, which mostly focus on estimations as opposed to testing. These include confidence, credibility or prediction intervals, Bayesian methods, decision-theoretic modeling and false discovery rates '"`UNIQ--ref-00000421-QINU`"'.Since its release in 2016, the ASA statement has been cited about 1,700 times and downloaded nearly 300,000 times. In 2017, the ASA organized a symposium on statistical methods, which resulted in 43 articles on the topic of the responsible use of P-values'"`UNIQ--ref-00000422-QINU`"' . Statisticians and scientists are currently considering “a world beyond p<0.05” ('"`UNIQ--ref-00000423-QINU`"'), suggesting a wide spectrum of solutions and possibilities. One solution involves changing the P-value threshold for statistical significance from 0.05 to 0.005 ('"`UNIQ--ref-00000424-QINU`"''"`UNIQ--ref-00000425-QINU`"'). By contrast, others argue that reproducibility of results and pre-registration are the best means for preventing selection bias '"`UNIQ--ref-00000426-QINU`"'. Others still recommend including more information when reporting P-values, such as the researcher’s confidence in the P-value or their assessment of the likelihood that a statistically significant finding is, in fact, a false positive result '"`UNIQ--ref-00000427-QINU`"'.Critiques, initiatives and recommendations require not only further academic discussion, but also significant educational reforms in statistics '"`UNIQ--ref-00000428-QINU`"'.'"`UNIQ--references-00000429-QINU`"'QINU`"'. '"`UNIQ--references-00000429-QINU`"')

Good Epidemiological Practice Guidelines + (The BRIDGE guidelines are the proposed best practices)

Universal Declaration of Human Rights + (The Belmont report '"`UNIQ--ref-0000020E-QINU`"' , the Declaration of Helsinki '"`UNIQ--ref-0000020F-QINU`"' and similar ethical and legal documents were enacted by governing bodies and professional associations. '"`UNIQ--references-00000210-QINU`"')
Balancing harms and benefits + (The Belmont report, '"`UNIQ--ref-000000B1-QINU`"' the Declaration of Helsinki '"`UNIQ--ref-000000B2-QINU`"' and similar ethical and legal documents were enacted by governing bodies and professional associations. '"`UNIQ--references-000000B3-QINU`"')
COMET Initiative + (The COMET initiative focuses on developing … The COMET initiative focuses on developing standardised sets of outcomes that represent a minimum that should be measured and reported in studies with different study designs. Core outcomes included in sets must be relevant for patients and healthcare providers. The COMET Initiative has a database open to all researchers planning to conduct a study with an 'advanced search' option to find core outcome sets appropriate for their studies'"`UNIQ--ref-0000095C-QINU`"'.heir studies'"`UNIQ--ref-0000095C-QINU`"'.)
Image Integrity + (The Catholic University of Leuven (KU Leuv … The Catholic University of Leuven (KU Leuven) has a dedicated webpage on image integrity. They identified some of the most important sources and tools on the subject (available [https://www.kuleuven.be/english/research/integrity/practices/image-processing here], accessed on 24-04-2020). As their page is brief, a more elaborate description of what it contains, and additional sources, follows below.Rossner & Yamada (2004)'"`UNIQ--ref-000002E1-QINU`"' wrote a prominent article arguing for a standard for image integrity. Working as Editors for The Journals of Cell Biology, they noticed the discrepancies between guidelines on image integrity journals gave to their authors (if any). To have a comprehensive overview, they developed their own guidelines for the Journal of Cell biology. They write that, for every aspect of the guideline, the main question is: “Is the image that results from this adjustment still an accurate representation of the original data?”'"`UNIQ--ref-000002E2-QINU`"' (p. 5). Whenever the answer is ‘no’, researchers should provide a detailed description of the adjustments, its purpose and the original image on request. If not, their actions might be regarded as misconduct.A step-by-step translation of the guideline is available on the website of American Journal Experts (access [https://www.aje.com/en/arc/avoiding-image-fraud-7-rules-editing-images/, here], accessed on 24-04-2020) and on the KU Leuven webpage. A similar guideline, and additional editorials on the subject, are given by the journal Nature on their editorial policies page (available [https://www.nature.com/nature-research/editorial-policies/image-integrity here], accessed on 24-04-2020). The Center for Ethics and Values in the Sciences, of the University of Alabama in Birmingham, created a website for both students and researchers with much material regarding image integrity (available [https://ori.hhs.gov/education/products/RIandImages/default.html here], accessed on 24-04-2020). They provide guidelines with more in depth explanations and illustration videos, but also educational material such as case studies, discussion hand outs and a quiz. The Office of Research Integrity provides a tutorial on how to use ‘action sets’ in photoshop (available [https://ori.hhs.gov/actions here], accessed on 24-04-2020). These actions sets allow you to document the changes you make to an image and ‘slide’ (i.e. going back and forward) between all the steps you made. The process of the image you manipulated will hereby be completely transparent if you provide the ‘action set’ combine with a copy of the original image.For those reviewing papers, a free open source program, called InspectJ, is available on GitHub to identify cloning, stitching, patching and erased objects within an image. An advanced version also provides histogram equalization and gamma correction for improved image inspections (both available [https://github.com/ZMBH-Imaging-Facility/InspectJ here], accessed on 24-04-2020)'"`UNIQ--references-000002E3-QINU`"'-04-2020) '"`UNIQ--references-000002E3-QINU`"')
Research culture + (The Concordat to Support Research Integrit … The Concordat to Support Research Integrity lists eight aspects which are important for a good research environment to promote best practices and research integrity.'"`UNIQ--ref-000004ED-QINU`"' They state a good research culture should include, as a minimum, the following: *Have clear policies, practices and procedures to support researchers*Have research ethics and integrity training, including mentoring opportunities*Have robust management systems ensuring implementation of policies related to research, its integrity and researchers behaviour*Create awareness among the standards of behaviour of researchers*Ensure a system is in place that can identify concerns at an early stage*Provide support mechanisms for those that need assistance*Have policies in place ensuring no stigma is attached to those that find they need assistance from their emplyees*Communicate and implement processes to raise concerns about research integrity'"`UNIQ--references-000004EE-QINU`"'h integrity '"`UNIQ--references-000004EE-QINU`"')
Conflicts of interest in the review of grant proposals + (The Dutch funding agencies ZonMw and NWO h … The Dutch funding agencies ZonMw and NWO have set up guidelines for dealing with COIs in the reviewing process. COI citeria include: *personal interests*professional interests*interests arising out of other positions*business (financial or economic) interestsThe following personal interests always exclude participation in the process: *being the applicant or joint applicant*having written any part of an application without being an applicant or joint applicant*having any of the following relations with the applicant or joint applicant*actual or anticipated project manager or sub-project manager*direct manager*blood relation or affinity (up to and including the third degree*contract of cohabitation (other than a civil partnership*dean of the applicant’s institute'"`UNIQ--ref-00000220-QINU`"'Both ZonMw and NWO ask reviewers to declare their COIs. Next, the head of the committee assesses the impact of the declared COIs. He or she can decide if the reviewer cannot assess a particular application, or if he or she should not partake in the review process at all. Subsequently, the committee states whether they agree or disagree with this decision. Moreover, to ensure impartiality, individual reviewers do not get to see each other’s scores. After the review process has concluded, the reviewers assess whether the process has raised new insights into COIs. In the worst case scenario, if the process has been influenced by a reviewer’s COI, the whole review process is redone.'"`UNIQ--references-00000221-QINU`"'done. '"`UNIQ--references-00000221-QINU`"')
Take no full responsibility for the integrity of the research project and its reports + (The ECoC states that all partners involved … The ECoC states that all partners involved in research take full responsibility for the overall integrity of the project. All partners are also expected to have agreed at the outset on the standards of research integrity that will be maintained. 1 This can include all aspects of the research, from conception to publication, in order to prevent ambiguity at a later stage. The Montreal Statement on Research Integrity in Cross-Boundary Research Collaborations 4 states that all involved partners openly discuss their customary practices and expectations, including those of research integrity. While every individual is responsible fully for their own contribution, there should also be a collective responsibility for the integrity of the project. 4tive responsibility for the integrity of the project. 4)
ENERI Decision Tree + (The ENERI Decision Tree summarizes and lin … The ENERI Decision Tree summarizes and links to many important laws, regulations, codes and other documents that can help researchers to work ethically and with integrity and that can support RECs and RIOs in performing their roles adequately and fulfilling their responsibilities. More detailed information on all topics covered in the Decision Tree is available in the ENERI Manual on Research Ethics and Research Integrity. Besides, the [[Resource:C386dbba-2f69-4257-89c2-903898cf1f12|ENERI Classroom]] as well as the [[Guide:Bbe860a3-56a9-45f7-b787-031689729e52|VIRT2UE Training Guide]] provide access to educational materials on research ethics and research integrity that help fostering skills conducive to ethical reflection.Furthermore, the [https://embassy.science/wiki-wiki/index.php/Special:BrowseData/Resource?_search_Resource_Type%5B0%5D=Cases cases] in the resources section of the Embassy as well as the educational scenarios developed by EnTIRE that are available in the [https://embassy.science/wiki-wiki/index.php/Special:BrowseData/Resource?_search_Resource_Type%5B0%5D=Education educational resources] section can be used for further reflections and deliberations on specific research ethics and research integrity problems.ch ethics and research integrity problems.)
EQIPD (Enhancing Quality in Preclinical Data) + (The EQIPD quality system is currently appl … The EQIPD quality system is currently applied at research labs within the IMI consortium and a group of interested labs. EQIPD made all the developed resources available to the public. Currently, this includes a preprint publication describing the EQIPD system in greater detail on the Open Science Framework [https://osf.io/ng32b/ here]. Additionally, a wiki page, [https://eqipd-toolbox.paasp.net/wiki/EQIPD_Quality_System the EQIPD toolbox], is available providing information developed by the consortium and a broader stakeholder group.onsortium and a broader stakeholder group.)
Supervision Guidelines + (The European Code of Conduct (2017) specif … The European Code of Conduct (2017) specifies that training is necessary for researchers to improve supervision and mentoring. '"`UNIQ--ref-00000071-QINU`"' Please click [https://www.embassy.science/resources/the-european-code-of-conduct-for-research-integrity#entry:29:url here] for the European Code of Conduct.'"`UNIQ--references-00000072-QINU`"'duct. '"`UNIQ--references-00000072-QINU`"')
Responsible mentoring + (The European Code of Conduct for Research … The European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity (ECoC RI) defines a good practice in mentorship:'"`UNIQ--ref-0000054F-QINU`"'“Senior researchers, research leaders and supervisors mentor their team members and offer specific guidance and training to properly develop, design and structure their research activity and to foster a culture of research integrity.” The ECoC RI also defines the misuse of seniority to encourage violations of research integrity as an unacceptable practice.The Office for Research Integrity of the US Department of Health and Human Services defines the expectations of trainees and mentors in the research process.'"`UNIQ--ref-00000550-QINU`"'“Trainees need to know:· how much time they will be expected to spend on their mentor’s research;· the criteria that will be used for judging performance and form the basis of letters of recommendation;· how responsibilities are shared or divided in the research setting;· standard operating procedures, such as the way data are recorded and interpreted; and, most importantly,· how credit is assigned, that is, how authorship and ownership are established.Mentors need to know that a trainee will:· do assigned work in a conscientious way,· respect the authority of others working in the research setting,· follow research regulations and research protocols, and· live by agreements established for authorship and ownership.”'"`UNIQ--references-00000551-QINU`"'hip.” '"`UNIQ--references-00000551-QINU`"')
Montreal Statement on Research Integrity in Cross-Boundary Research Collaborations + (The European Code of Conduct states that g … The European Code of Conduct states that good research practice with regard to collaborations are based on the following principles:*All partners in research collaborations take responsibility for the integrity of the research.*All partners in research collaborations agree at the outset on the goals of the research and on the process for communicating their research as transparently and openly as possible.*All partners formally agree at the start of their collaboration on expectations and standards concerning research integrity, on the laws and regulations that will apply, on protection of the intellectual property of collaborators, and on procedures for handling conflicts and possible cases of misconduct.*All partners in research collaborations are properly informed and consulted about submissions for publication of the research results. (ECC 2017, section 2.6)Vicens and Bourne (2007) suggest the following rules: '"`UNIQ--ref-00000208-QINU`"' #Do Not Be Lured into Just Any Collaboration#Decide at the Beginning Who Will Work on What Tasks#Stick to Your Tasks#Be Open and Honest#Feel Respect, Get Respect#Communicate, Communicate, and Communicate#Protect Yourself from a Collaboration That Turns Sour#Always Acknowledge and Cite Your Collaborators#Seek Advice from Experienced Scientists#If Your Collaboration Satisfies You, Keep It Going'"`UNIQ--references-00000209-QINU`"'Going '"`UNIQ--references-00000209-QINU`"')
Collaborative working + (The European Code of Conduct'"`UNIQ--ref-0 … The European Code of Conduct'"`UNIQ--ref-00000052-QINU`"' states that good research practice with regard to collaborations are based on the following principles:*"All partners in research collaborations take responsibility for the integrity of the research.*All partners in research collaborations agree at the outset on the goals of the research and on the process for communicating their research as transparently and openly as possible.* All partners formally agree at the start of their collaboration on expectations and standards concerning research integrity, on the laws and regulations that will apply, on protection of the intellectual property of collaborators, and on procedures for handling conflicts and possible cases of misconduct.*All partners in research collaborations are properly informed and consulted about submissions for publication of the research results. "(ECC 2017, section 2.6)Vicens and Bourne (2007) suggest the following rules'"`UNIQ--ref-00000053-QINU`"': #Do Not Be Lured into Just Any Collaboration#Decide at the Beginning Who Will Work on What Tasks#Stick to Your Tasks#Be Open and Honest#Feel Respect, Get Respect#Communicate, Communicate, and Communicate#Protect Yourself from a Collaboration That Turns Sour#Always Acknowledge and Cite Your Collaborators#Seek Advice from Experienced Scientists#If Your Collaboration Satisfies You, Keep It Going'"`UNIQ--references-00000054-QINU`"'Going '"`UNIQ--references-00000054-QINU`"')
FAIR principles: sharing data for maximisation of results + (The European Commission decided to run a p … The European Commission decided to run a pilot under Horizon 2020 the [http://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/data/ref/h2020/other/hi/oa-pilot/h2020-hi-erc-oa-guide_en.pdf Open Research Data Pilot] (ORD pilot). Which aims to improve and maximise access to and re-use of research data generated by Horizon 2020 projects. This initiative supports and requires the application of FAIR principles within the H2020 research projects, and therefore it strives to maximise the output and outreach of publicly funded research. and outreach of publicly funded research.)
Research integrity in practice: dealing with everyday dilemmas + (The European Commission funded VIRT2UE pro … The European Commission funded VIRT2UE project has designed a set of practical tools for recognizing and dealing with RI dilemmas in practice. One of these tools is the so called ‘Virtues, Values and Norms in Perspective’ exercise. In this exercise, inspired by a [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5236068/ virtue ethics approach to RI education], '"`UNIQ--ref-0000009C-QINU`"' participants are asked to reflect on a concrete dilemma experienced by one of the participants. By engaging in a dialogue, trainees are asked to put themselves in the shoes of the people involved in the case at stake and reflect on which values would be important for each of them. Then they are asked to reflect on which virtues are required to deal with the dilemma at stake: are they in conflict with each other? How are they related to salient norms? Which virtue is the most important in this situation? What is needed (concretely) to act in accordance with that virtue?This exercise aims at fostering reflection in oneself by means of understanding the concepts of virtues/values and norms and their relationship with practice.Another initiative is the [https://www.eur.nl/sites/corporate/files/24708_integriteitsspel_interactief_2016.pdf Rotterdam Dilemma Game], '"`UNIQ--ref-0000009D-QINU`"' which focuses less on virtue ethics but nonetheless provides structure to discuss RI dilemmas.'"`UNIQ--references-0000009E-QINU`"'mmas. '"`UNIQ--references-0000009E-QINU`"')
Initiative for Open Citations (I4OC) + (The Initiative has asked scholarly publish … The Initiative has asked scholarly publishers, who were already depositing the reference lists of their publications at Crossref, to make them open and available to everyone. Before this Initiative, only 1% of all references deposited at Crossref were open. As of August 2021, the percentage of publications with open references has grown from 1% to 88% out of 56.1 million articles with references submitted to Crossref.'"`UNIQ--ref-00000544-QINU`"' Among significant publishers there are [https://www.crossref.org/members/prep/239 BMJ], [https://www.crossref.org/members/prep/56 Cambridge University Press], [https://www.crossref.org/members/prep/281 MIT Press], [https://www.crossref.org/members/prep/286 Oxford University Press], [https://www.crossref.org/members/prep/292 The Royal Society of Chemistry], [https://www.crossref.org/members/prep/179 SAGE Publications], and [https://www.crossref.org/members/prep/311 Wiley].'"`UNIQ--ref-00000545-QINU`"' You can see the full list [https://i4oc.org/#:~:text=Participating%20publishers here].'"`UNIQ--references-00000546-QINU`"'ere]. '"`UNIQ--references-00000546-QINU`"')
Honorary or gift authorship + (The International Committee of Medical Jou … The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) provides recommendations for defining the roles of authors and contributors. The ICMJE recommends the four main criteria that should be taken into account for authorship. These criteria include a) substantial contribution related to the study design, data collection, data analysis, and data interpretation, and b) drafting and critically revising the work, and c) approval for the final version for publication, and d) accountability for all aspects of the work, including its integrity '"`UNIQ--ref-000006BF-QINU`"'. The ICMJE emphasizes that those who meet all four criteria should be assigned as authors and provides guidance for acknowledging those who do not meet all of the above-mentioned criteria but still contributed to the study and whose contribution should be acknowledged. The Contributor Roles Taxonomy (CRediT) is another example of guidance for avoiding authorship malpractices and disputes '"`UNIQ--ref-000006C0-QINU`"'. CRediT statement contains 14 items related to the authors’ contributions. For example, some of the items included in the statement are the authors’ contributions in conceptualization, methodology, analysis, writing and editing the manuscript, visualization, supervision, etc. Many publishers have already adopted the CRediT taxonomy and encourage authors to use it when providing authors contributions during the manuscript submission process '"`UNIQ--ref-000006C1-QINU`"'.ion process '"`UNIQ--ref-000006C1-QINU`"'.)
Development and Value of National Research Integrity Codes + (The Irish national statement for research integrity 7 is developed in line with the ECoC. - Principles of Research Integrity - Research Misconduct - Collaboratiosns)
Good Practice and Reporting Cases in Switzerland + (The Plagiarism Control Group checks the re … The Plagiarism Control Group checks the research proposals submitted to the SNSF both at random (5% of all submissions) and when it is alerted to potential research integrity cases by persons outside the SNSF.The SNSF uses the ''iThenticate'' software, produced by Turnitin, in order to compare research proposals with texts on the internet and scientific databases. Only results with a similarity index of ≥ 10% and/or the largest possible degree of correspondence of >200 words are followed up.respondence of >200 words are followed up.)
Reasonable standards for career advancement + (The Qualification portfolio, implemented by Utrecht UMC. To be described in further detail elsewhere on The Embassy.)
The Dilemma Game + (The Taskforce Scientific Integrity from th … The Taskforce Scientific Integrity from the Erasmus University Rotterdam has made a number of recommendations for use of the game in their institution. One of the recommendations is that the game is used as a part of PhD training, as well as a faculty training session on research integrity.'"`UNIQ--ref-00000002-QINU`"' The dilemma game has also proved useful beyond its home institution, for example it is used as an exercise in [https://www.ucl.ac.uk/research/integrity/training-accordion/integrity-seminars research integrity seminars] provided by University College London and the PRINTEGER project has listed the dilemma game as one of the [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/ learning modules] on their platform. As an interactive and educational exercise, the dilemma game is used in training sessions for research integrity trainers by the Horizon 2020 VIRT2UE project. '''Dilemma game app'''The developers have been adapting the card game into an app, in order to make the dilemmas not only more accessible, but also more relevant to a rapidly changing research environment and available for different purposes. With this app, researchers and teachers can use it individually, in a classroom game-mode and in a lecture mode, by connecting in a group. Moreover, users are now more regularly confronted with integrity dilemmas through notifications, with new dilemma’s added each month and the invitation to share own research integrity dilemma’s. This app is a great example of an inspiring initiative, since it serves different objectives: it is a usable tool for training purposes, creates ongoing awareness and supports research culture by facilitating discussion.The dilemma game can be downloaded as an application on [https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=nl.eur.dilemmagame&gl=NL Android devices] and [https://apps.apple.com/nl/app/dilemma-game/id1494087665 iOS]. The app has three modes: individual, group and lecture mode, allowing users to interact with the dilemma's in a variety of ways. You can also open the lecture mode in your [https://dilemmagame.eur.nl/ui/ browser], so you can show students the dilemma and their answers. '"`UNIQ--references-00000003-QINU`"'answers. '"`UNIQ--references-00000003-QINU`"')
Conflict of interest: a research integrity and research ethics perspective + (The [[Resource:C386dbba-2f69-4257-89c2-903898cf1f12|ENERI Classroom]] … The [[Resource:C386dbba-2f69-4257-89c2-903898cf1f12|ENERI Classroom]] as well as the ENERI [[Resource:F47b9bc7-c5a5-4b92-918b-438101bd9434|Research Ethics and Research Integrity Manual]] describe in more detail what COIs are and how they can be avoided and managed responsibly. [[Theme:1fc5c5b6-6c30-4400-a79b-8838b5a041cc|Path2Integrity]] has developed a [[Resource:C13f2fea-2e63-4da9-8b9a-e4039c3dfde1|learning card]] (instruction for a learning unit) on COIs (card Y7).The Research Ethics Program of the University of California, San Diego has developed an [http://research-ethics.org/topics/conflicts-of-interest/#summary educational resource on COIs].The Office of Research Integrity (ORI) has collected [https://ori.hhs.gov/conflicts-interest-and-commitment resources on COIs and commitment].The Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) has developed [https://publicationethics.org/competinginterests guidelines] for addressing COIs in the realm of publication ethics.The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) has [http://www.icmje.org/disclosure-of-interest/ disclosure of interest form].of-interest/ disclosure of interest form].)
Cross-boundary collaborations + (The [https://wcrif.org/documents/354-montr … The [https://wcrif.org/documents/354-montreal-statement-english/file Montreal Statement on Research Integrity] in Cross-Boundary Research Collaborations was developed at the 3rd World Conference on Research Integrity, 2013. '"`UNIQ--ref-00000055-QINU`"' The statement details twenty separate responsibilities of individuals and institutions concerning general collaborations, management of collaborations, collaborative relationships, and outcomes of research. '"`UNIQ--references-00000056-QINU`"'rch. '"`UNIQ--references-00000056-QINU`"')
Legal rights of accused scientists + (The [https://www.embassy.science/resources … The [https://www.embassy.science/resources/the-european-code-of-conduct-for-research-integrity European Code of Conduct] states that fairness and integrity are most important for procedures for investigating misconduct, principles to be followed are also stated.'"`UNIQ--ref-00000073-QINU`"''"`UNIQ--references-00000074-QINU`"'NU`"' '"`UNIQ--references-00000074-QINU`"')
Publication, Dissemination and Research Integrity: An Educational Scenario by the EnTIRE project + (The aim of all eight scenarios is to allow … The aim of all eight scenarios is to allow researchers, research ethics committees ('RECs'), research integrity offices ('RIOs') and research administrators to focus their reflection on core principles and research contexts that enshrine good research practice as well as their local rules and practices.s well as their local rules and practices.)