Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Several organizations have developed guidelines to help authors and editors of medical journals negotiate ethics dilemmas in publishing, but very little is known about how these guidelines translate to the context of forensic psychiatry. In this article, we explore the important topic of ethics in forensic psychiatry publishing. First, we review the historical development of ethics principles in medical and psychiatric publishing. We then analyze eight ethics dilemmas that have arisen in the publication of The Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law (The Journal) from 2000 to 2009, including disputes about authorship, conflict of interest, redundant publication, bias in peer reviewers, confidentiality in case reports, and others. We identify ethics principles that were relevant to the dilemmas and discuss how they were resolved by the editors of The Journal. We conclude by using the principles identified in the practical resolution of ethics dilemmas to derive a conceptual foundation for ethics in forensic psychiatry publishing.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!