• 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

科研不端行为:来自一个发展中国家的报告。

Research Misconduct: A Report from a Developing Country.

作者信息

Khadem-Rezaiyan Majid, Dadgarmoghaddam Maliheh

机构信息

Dept. of Community Medicine and Public Health, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran.

出版信息

Iran J Public Health. 2017 Oct;46(10):1374-1378.

PMID:29308381
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5750349/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Cheating rate is rising and engages newer methods. This study performed to estimate the rate of research misconduct in the thesis of undergraduate and postgraduate medical students in 2015.

METHODS

In this cross sectional study, all undergraduate and postgraduate medical students graduated during the study period in 2015, from the School of Medicine, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran were asked to fill a small checklist anonymously. It consisted of two demographic questions and two other ones for estimation of research misconduct. All three major types of research misconduct were explained in the checklist. We used the Randomized Response Technique for sensitive question in this survey. We asked the respondent to choose one question randomly and answer to it. The probability of selection of each question was equal.

RESULTS

There were 149 filled questionnaires out of which 44 (31%) were graduated for General Practitioner, 63 (44%) for Residency, 31(21%) for Master Degree and 6 (4%) for Ph.D. Fifty-two percent (75) were male. More than half of participants were graduated between 2011 and 2012. The majority of participants were native (104, 81%). Undergraduate students had an estimation of 19% research misconduct in performing the thesis while this was 26% of postgraduate students. Males were nearly two times comparing to females in this issue (30% vs. 16%).

CONCLUSION

This high estimation must be considered in future policy making about observing strictly on researches.

摘要

背景

学术造假率不断上升且手段日益翻新。本研究旨在估算2015年医学专业本科及研究生毕业论文中的学术不端率。

方法

在这项横断面研究中,要求2015年研究期间从伊朗马什哈德医科大学医学院毕业的所有医学专业本科及研究生匿名填写一份简短的清单。该清单包括两个人口统计学问题和另外两个用于评估学术不端行为的问题。清单中对所有三种主要类型的学术不端行为都进行了解释。在本次调查中,我们对敏感问题采用了随机应答技术。我们要求受访者随机选择一个问题并回答。每个问题被选中的概率相等。

结果

共收到149份填写好的问卷,其中44人(31%)为全科医生毕业,63人(44%)为住院医师毕业,31人(21%)为硕士学位毕业,6人(4%)为博士学位毕业。52%(75人)为男性。超过一半的参与者在2011年至2012年之间毕业。大多数参与者为本国人(104人,81%)。本科生在撰写论文时学术不端行为的估计率为19%,而研究生为26%。在这个问题上,男性与女性的比例几乎是两倍(30%对16%)。

结论

在未来制定关于严格监管研究的政策时,必须考虑到这种高估计率。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/fd61/5750349/9ab154705f02/IJPH-46-1374-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/fd61/5750349/9ab154705f02/IJPH-46-1374-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/fd61/5750349/9ab154705f02/IJPH-46-1374-g001.jpg

相似文献

1
Research Misconduct: A Report from a Developing Country.科研不端行为:来自一个发展中国家的报告。
Iran J Public Health. 2017 Oct;46(10):1374-1378.
2
Self-reported attitudes and behaviours of medical students in Pakistan regarding academic misconduct: a cross-sectional study.巴基斯坦医学生对学术不端行为的自我报告态度和行为:一项横断面研究。
BMC Med Ethics. 2014 May 29;15:43. doi: 10.1186/1472-6939-15-43.
3
Academic misconduct among medical students in a post-communist country.一个后共产主义国家医学生中的学术不端行为。
Med Educ. 2004 Mar;38(3):276-85. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2923.2004.01766.x.
4
Research Integrity Among PhD Students at the Faculty of Medicine: A Comparison of Three Scandinavian Universities.医学专业博士生的研究诚信:三所斯堪的纳维亚大学的比较。
J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2020 Oct;15(4):320-329. doi: 10.1177/1556264620929230. Epub 2020 Jun 12.
5
Combating Scientific Misconduct: The Role of Focused Workshops in Changing Attitudes Towards Plagiarism.打击科研不端行为:专题研讨会在改变对抄袭态度方面的作用。
Cureus. 2018 May 28;10(5):e2698. doi: 10.7759/cureus.2698.
6
Undergraduate and postgraduate pharmacy students' perceptions of plagiarism and academic honesty.本科生和研究生药学学生对剽窃和学术诚信的看法。
Am J Pharm Educ. 2009 Oct 1;73(6):105. doi: 10.5688/aj7306105.
7
[Research Misconduct in Japan and How It Is Covered by the Media].[日本的科研不端行为及其在媒体上的报道情况]
Yakugaku Zasshi. 2018;138(4):459-464. doi: 10.1248/yakushi.17-00181-1.
8
A proposed research misconduct policy for universities and postgraduate colleges in developing countries.一项针对发展中国家大学和研究生院校的拟议研究不当行为政策。
Niger Postgrad Med J. 2020 Jul-Sep;27(3):250-258. doi: 10.4103/npmj.npmj_51_20.
9
Reasons for and time to retraction of genetics articles published between 1970 and 2018.1970 年至 2018 年间发表的遗传学文章被撤稿的原因和时间。
J Med Genet. 2019 Nov;56(11):734-740. doi: 10.1136/jmedgenet-2019-106137. Epub 2019 Jul 12.
10
Comprehensive Survey of Plagiarism in Iran.伊朗抄袭行为综合调查。
Pak J Med Sci. 2020 Nov-Dec;36(7):1441-1448. doi: 10.12669/pjms.36.7.3456.

引用本文的文献

1
Opinion: Medical education in many low- and middle-income countries needs urgent attention and serious improvement.观点:许多低收入和中等收入国家的医学教育需要迫切关注和切实改进。
Front Med (Lausanne). 2025 Mar 26;12:1548112. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2025.1548112. eCollection 2025.
2
Knowledge, Attitude, and Practices About Research Integrity and Scientific Misconduct Among the Faculty and Medical Postgraduates Working in Medical Colleges in North Karnataka and Central India: A Cross-Sectional Online Survey.印度北部卡纳塔克邦和中部医学院教职工及医学研究生对研究诚信和科学不端行为的认知、态度及行为:一项横断面在线调查
Cureus. 2024 Apr 28;16(4):e59200. doi: 10.7759/cureus.59200. eCollection 2024 Apr.
3

本文引用的文献

1
Publication Ethics: A Case Series with Recommendations According to Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).出版伦理:根据出版伦理委员会 (COPE) 的案例系列及建议
Iran J Basic Med Sci. 2012 Sep;15(5):1003-7.
2
How many scientists fabricate and falsify research? A systematic review and meta-analysis of survey data.有多少科学家伪造和篡改研究数据?对调查数据的系统评价和荟萃分析。
PLoS One. 2009 May 29;4(5):e5738. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0005738.
3
Newton and the fudge factor.牛顿与人为因素。
Knowledge, attitudes and practices about research misconduct among medical residents in southwest China: a cross-sectional study.
中国西南地区住院医师对科研不端行为的认知、态度和实践:一项横断面研究。
BMC Med Educ. 2024 Mar 14;24(1):284. doi: 10.1186/s12909-024-05277-6.
4
Practical tips for teaching academic integrity in the digital age.数字时代学术诚信教学实用小贴士。
MedEdPublish (2016). 2019 Jun 21;8:142. doi: 10.15694/mep.2019.000142.1. eCollection 2019.
5
Construction and Validation of the Research Misconduct Scale for Social Science University Students.社会科学专业大学生研究不端行为量表的构建与验证
Front Psychol. 2022 May 9;13:859466. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.859466. eCollection 2022.
6
Self-Reported Academic Misconduct among Medical Students: Perception and Prevalence.医学生自我报告的学术不端行为:认知与流行率。
ScientificWorldJournal. 2021 Aug 23;2021:5580797. doi: 10.1155/2021/5580797. eCollection 2021.
7
Assessing research misconduct in Iran: a perspective from Iranian medical faculty members.评估伊朗的科研不端行为:伊朗医学教师的观点。
BMC Med Ethics. 2021 Jun 21;22(1):74. doi: 10.1186/s12910-021-00642-2.
8
Psychometric properties of Persian version of the research misconduct questionnaire (PRMQ).研究行为不端调查问卷波斯语版(PRMQ)的心理测量特性。
J Med Ethics Hist Med. 2020 Nov 10;13:18. doi: 10.18502/jmehm.v13i18.4826. eCollection 2020.
9
A review of the current concerns about misconduct in medical sciences publications and the consequences.当前对医学科学出版物不当行为及其后果的关注综述。
Daru. 2020 Jun;28(1):359-369. doi: 10.1007/s40199-020-00332-1. Epub 2020 Feb 19.
10
Evolution of Iran's health research system over the past 50 years: a narrative review.伊朗卫生研究系统在过去 50 年中的发展历程:叙事性回顾。
J Glob Health. 2018 Dec;8(2):020703. doi: 10.7189/jogh.08.020703.
Science. 1973 Feb 23;179(4075):751-8. doi: 10.1126/science.179.4075.751.
4
Fraud: causes and culprits as perceived by science and the media. Institutional changes, rather than individual motivations, encourage misconduct.欺诈:科学与媒体所认为的成因及罪魁祸首。制度变革而非个人动机助长了不当行为。
EMBO Rep. 2007 Jan;8(1):3-7. doi: 10.1038/sj.embor.7400884.
5
Research misconduct, retraction, and cleansing the medical literature: lessons from the Poehlman case.科研不端行为、撤稿与医学文献净化:波埃尔曼案的教训
Ann Intern Med. 2006 Apr 18;144(8):609-13. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-144-8-200604180-00123. Epub 2006 Mar 6.
6
Scientists behaving badly.行为不端的科学家。
Nature. 2005 Jun 9;435(7043):737-8. doi: 10.1038/435737a.
7
Scientific authorship. Part 1. A window into scientific fraud?科学署名。第一部分。洞察科学欺诈的窗口?
Mutat Res. 2005 Jan;589(1):17-30. doi: 10.1016/j.mrrev.2004.07.003.
8
Research misconduct.研究不端行为。
Clin Radiol. 2003 Jul;58(7):499-504. doi: 10.1016/s0009-9260(03)00176-4.
9
Misconduct in medical research: whose responsibility?医学研究中的不当行为:谁之责?
Intern Med J. 2003 Apr;33(4):186-91. doi: 10.1046/j.1445-5994.2003.00373.x.
10
Randomized response: a survey technique for eliminating evasive answer bias.随机化回答:一种消除回避性回答偏差的调查技术。
J Am Stat Assoc. 1965 Mar;60(309):63-6.