• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

研究人员对纳米技术的资金来源和利益冲突的看法。

Researcher views about funding sources and conflicts of interest in nanotechnology.

机构信息

Department of Communication, Cornell University, 313 Kennedy Hall, Ithaca, NY 1483, USA.

出版信息

Sci Eng Ethics. 2012 Dec;18(4):699-717. doi: 10.1007/s11948-011-9264-4. Epub 2011 Feb 19.

DOI:10.1007/s11948-011-9264-4
PMID:21331667
Abstract

Dependence in nanotechnology on external funding and academic-industry relationships has led to questions concerning its influence on research directions, as well as the potential for conflicts of interest to arise and impact scientific integrity and public trust. This study uses a survey of 193 nanotechnology industry and academic researchers to explore whether they share similar concerns. Although these concerns are not unique to nanotechnology, its emerging nature and the prominence of industry funding lend credence to understanding its researchers' views, as these researchers are shaping the norms and direction of the field. The results of the survey show general agreement that funding sources are influencing research directions in nanotechnology; many respondents saw this influence in their own work as well as other researchers' work. Respondents also agreed that funding considerations were likely to influence whether researchers shared their results. Irrespective of their institutional affiliation or funding status, twice as many researchers as not considered financial conflicts of interest a cause for concern, and three times as many respondents as not disagreed financial conflicts of interest in nanotechnology were uncommon. Only a third was satisfied with the way that conflicts of interest are currently managed and believed current procedures would protect the integrity of nanotechnology research. The results also found differences in views depending on researchers' institutional affiliation and funding status.

摘要

纳米技术对外部资金和产学研关系的依赖,引发了人们对其影响研究方向的质疑,以及潜在利益冲突的出现,进而影响科学诚信和公众信任。本研究通过对 193 名纳米技术产业和学术研究人员的调查,探讨了他们是否存在类似的担忧。尽管这些担忧并非纳米技术所特有,但由于其新兴性质和产业资金的突出地位,有必要了解研究人员的观点,因为这些研究人员正在塑造该领域的规范和方向。调查结果显示,研究人员普遍认为资金来源正在影响纳米技术的研究方向;许多受访者认为这种影响不仅存在于自己的工作中,也存在于其他研究人员的工作中。受访者还认为,资金考虑因素可能会影响研究人员是否分享他们的研究成果。无论其机构隶属关系或资金状况如何,两倍于不认为财务利益冲突值得关注的研究人员认为财务利益冲突是纳米技术中常见的问题,三倍于不认为财务利益冲突在纳米技术中不常见的受访者认为财务利益冲突在纳米技术中不常见。只有三分之一的人对当前处理利益冲突的方式感到满意,并认为当前的程序将保护纳米技术研究的完整性。研究结果还发现,研究人员的机构隶属关系和资金状况不同,其观点也存在差异。

相似文献

1
Researcher views about funding sources and conflicts of interest in nanotechnology.研究人员对纳米技术的资金来源和利益冲突的看法。
Sci Eng Ethics. 2012 Dec;18(4):699-717. doi: 10.1007/s11948-011-9264-4. Epub 2011 Feb 19.
2
Managing Conflicts and Maximizing Transparency in Industry-Funded Research.管理行业资助研究中的冲突和提高透明度。
AJOB Empir Bioeth. 2020 Oct-Dec;11(4):223-232. doi: 10.1080/23294515.2020.1798562. Epub 2020 Aug 18.
3
Institutions' expectations for researchers' self-funding, federal grant holding, and private industry involvement: manifold drivers of self-interest and researcher behavior.机构对研究人员自筹资金、持有联邦拨款以及参与私营企业的期望:自身利益和研究人员行为的多种驱动因素。
Acad Med. 2009 Nov;84(11):1491-9. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0b013e3181bb2ca6.
4
Researcher Perspectives on Conflicts of Interest: A Qualitative Analysis of Views from Academia.研究人员对利益冲突的看法:对学术界观点的定性分析
Sci Eng Ethics. 2015 Aug;21(4):843-55. doi: 10.1007/s11948-014-9580-6. Epub 2014 Aug 13.
5
Patient Advocacy Organizations, Industry Funding, and Conflicts of Interest.患者倡导组织、行业资助与利益冲突。
JAMA Intern Med. 2017 Mar 1;177(3):344-350. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2016.8443.
6
Researchers' views of the acceptability of restrictive provisions in clinical trial agreements with industry sponsors.研究人员对与行业赞助商签订的临床试验协议中限制性条款可接受性的看法。
Account Res. 2005 Jul-Sep;12(3):163-91. doi: 10.1080/08989620500216380.
7
Aware, Yet Ignorant: Exploring the Views of Early Career Researchers About Funding and Conflicts of Interests in Science.知晓却无知:探索早期职业研究人员对科学领域资金及利益冲突的看法
Sci Eng Ethics. 2017 Feb;23(1):147-164. doi: 10.1007/s11948-016-9764-3. Epub 2016 Mar 15.
8
Industry-sponsored research.行业资助的研究。
Injury. 2008 Jun;39(6):666-80. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2008.02.013.
9
Ten steps to developing a national agenda to address financial conflicts of interest in industry sponsored clinical research.制定国家议程以解决行业资助临床研究中经济利益冲突的十个步骤。
Account Res. 2005 Apr-Jun;12(2):139-55. doi: 10.1080/08989620590957229.
10
Navigating the Murky Waters of Conflict of Interest: Searching for the Middle Path.在利益冲突的浑水中探寻方向:寻找中间道路。
J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2016 Feb;11(1):67-71. doi: 10.1177/1556264616637962.

引用本文的文献

1
Values in University-Industry Collaborations: The Case of Academics Working at Universities of Technology.大学-产业合作中的价值观:以技术大学工作的学者为例。
Sci Eng Ethics. 2019 Dec;25(6):1633-1656. doi: 10.1007/s11948-019-00144-w. Epub 2019 Oct 16.
2
The credibility of scientific communication sources regarding climate change: A population-based survey experiment.气候变化相关科学传播源可信度的一项基于人群的调查实验。
Public Underst Sci. 2019 Jul;28(5):534-553. doi: 10.1177/0963662519840946. Epub 2019 Apr 17.
3
Best practices in nutrition science to earn and keep the public's trust.

本文引用的文献

1
Failure to discount for conflict of interest when evaluating medical literature: a randomised trial of physicians.在评估医学文献时未能对利益冲突进行折扣处理:对医生的一项随机试验。
J Med Ethics. 2010 May;36(5):265-70. doi: 10.1136/jme.2009.034496.
2
A comparison of conflict of interest policies at peer-reviewed journals in different scientific disciplines.不同科学学科的同行评审期刊利益冲突政策比较。
Sci Eng Ethics. 2007 Jun;13(2):147-57. doi: 10.1007/s11948-007-9011-z. Epub 2007 Jun 7.
3
Peer review: the best of the blemished?
营养科学领域赢得和保持公众信任的最佳实践。
Am J Clin Nutr. 2019 Jan 1;109(1):225-243. doi: 10.1093/ajcn/nqy337.
4
Aware, Yet Ignorant: Exploring the Views of Early Career Researchers About Funding and Conflicts of Interests in Science.知晓却无知:探索早期职业研究人员对科学领域资金及利益冲突的看法
Sci Eng Ethics. 2017 Feb;23(1):147-164. doi: 10.1007/s11948-016-9764-3. Epub 2016 Mar 15.
5
Defining Nano, Nanotechnology and Nanomedicine: Why Should It Matter?定义纳米、纳米技术和纳米医学:为何这很重要?
Sci Eng Ethics. 2016 Oct;22(5):1255-1276. doi: 10.1007/s11948-015-9705-6. Epub 2015 Sep 15.
Am J Med. 2007 Apr;120(4):287-8. doi: 10.1016/j.amjmed.2007.02.013.
4
Relationship between funding source and conclusion among nutrition-related scientific articles.营养相关科学文章的资金来源与结论之间的关系。
PLoS Med. 2007 Jan;4(1):e5. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.0040005.
5
Nanotechnology: the challenge of regulating known unknowns.
J Law Med Ethics. 2006 Winter;34(4):704-13. doi: 10.1111/j.1748-720X.2006.00090.x.
6
The protection of patients' rights in clinical trials.
Sci Eng Ethics. 2006 Jan;12(1):131-8. doi: 10.1007/s11948-006-0013-z.
7
Authors and publication practices.作者与出版惯例。
Sci Eng Ethics. 2006 Jan;12(1):41-52. doi: 10.1007/pl00022267.
8
Attitudes of academic and clinical researchers toward financial ties in research: a systematic review.学术与临床研究人员对研究中经济利益关系的态度:一项系统综述
Sci Eng Ethics. 2005 Oct;11(4):553-73. doi: 10.1007/s11948-005-0026-z.
9
The complexity of competing and conflicting interests.相互竞争和冲突的利益的复杂性。
Sci Eng Ethics. 2005 Oct;11(4):515-7. doi: 10.1007/s11948-005-0022-3.
10
Conflicts of interest in academic research: policies, processes, and attitudes.学术研究中的利益冲突:政策、流程与态度
Account Res. 2004 Apr-Jun;11(2):83-102. doi: 10.1080/03050620490512241.