Allegations of research misconduct, especially in federally-supported research, raise the specter of contentious, difficult confrontations. It is the obligation of the institution at which the research is conducted to ensure that a fair, competent, and thorough review of each allegation occurs. Recently revised Public Health Service research misconduct regulations set forth clear guidance and detailed requirements for institutional policies, inquiries, and investigations. Counsel to research institutions that receive federal support for research must be familiar with these regulations. Failure to prepare for, or respond quickly and compliantly to, allegations of research misconduct may result in injustice to an accused researcher, make definitive determinations impossible, expose an institution to regulatory penalties, and damage the reputation of both researchers and the institution.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|
Res Ethics
January 2025
National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, USA; National Institutes of Health, USA.
Journals and publishers are increasingly using artificial intelligence (AI) to screen submissions for potential misconduct, including plagiarism and data or image manipulation. While using AI can enhance the integrity of published manuscripts, it can also increase the risk of false/unsubstantiated allegations. Ambiguities related to journals' and publishers' responsibilities concerning fairness and transparency also raise ethical concerns.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFIn August 2024, The U.S. Food and Drug Administration rejected Lykos Therapeutics, Inc.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFRena D'Souza, who faces allegations of workplace misconduct, is suing the agency for discrimination.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFAccount Res
August 2024
Ropes & Gray LLP, Boston, MA, USA.
The founders of PubPeer envisioned their website as an online form of a "journal club" that would facilitate post-publication peer review. Recently, PubPeer comments have led to a significant number of research misconduct proceedings - a development that could not have been anticipated when the current federal research misconduct regulations were developed two decades ago. Yet the number, frequency, and velocity of PubPeer comments identifying data integrity concerns, and institutional and government practices that treat all such comments as potential research misconduct allegations, have overwhelmed institutions and threaten to divert attention and resources away from other research integrity initiatives.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFEnter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!