• 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

《评估研究人员的香港原则:促进研究诚信》

The Hong Kong Principles for assessing researchers: Fostering research integrity.

机构信息

Centre for Journalology, Clinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Canada.

School of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada.

出版信息

PLoS Biol. 2020 Jul 16;18(7):e3000737. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.3000737. eCollection 2020 Jul.

DOI:10.1371/journal.pbio.3000737
PMID:32673304
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7365391/
Abstract

For knowledge to benefit research and society, it must be trustworthy. Trustworthy research is robust, rigorous, and transparent at all stages of design, execution, and reporting. Assessment of researchers still rarely includes considerations related to trustworthiness, rigor, and transparency. We have developed the Hong Kong Principles (HKPs) as part of the 6th World Conference on Research Integrity with a specific focus on the need to drive research improvement through ensuring that researchers are explicitly recognized and rewarded for behaviors that strengthen research integrity. We present five principles: responsible research practices; transparent reporting; open science (open research); valuing a diversity of types of research; and recognizing all contributions to research and scholarly activity. For each principle, we provide a rationale for its inclusion and provide examples where these principles are already being adopted.

摘要

为了让知识有益于研究和社会,它必须是值得信赖的。值得信赖的研究在设计、执行和报告的各个阶段都是稳健、严谨和透明的。对研究人员的评估仍然很少考虑到可信度、严谨性和透明度等因素。我们制定了《香港原则》(HKPs),作为第六届世界研究诚信大会的一部分,特别关注需要通过确保研究人员因加强研究诚信的行为而得到明确认可和奖励,来推动研究改进。我们提出了五个原则:负责任的研究实践;透明报告;开放科学(开放研究);重视各种类型的研究;承认对研究和学术活动的所有贡献。对于每个原则,我们都提供了纳入的理由,并提供了已经采用这些原则的例子。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9b47/7365391/bd53b108e23f/pbio.3000737.g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9b47/7365391/bd53b108e23f/pbio.3000737.g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9b47/7365391/bd53b108e23f/pbio.3000737.g001.jpg

相似文献

1
The Hong Kong Principles for assessing researchers: Fostering research integrity.《评估研究人员的香港原则:促进研究诚信》
PLoS Biol. 2020 Jul 16;18(7):e3000737. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.3000737. eCollection 2020 Jul.
2
Gender, diversity, and the responsible assessment of researchers.性别、多样性与研究人员的负责任评估
PLoS Biol. 2021 Apr 27;19(4):e3001036. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.3001036. eCollection 2021 Apr.
3
Research integrity in greater China: surveying regulations, perceptions and knowledge of research integrity from a Hong Kong perspective.大中华地区的研究诚信:从香港视角调查研究诚信的法规、认知和知识。
Dev World Bioeth. 2013 Dec;13(3):125-37. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-8847.2012.00337.x. Epub 2012 Sep 20.
4
Scientific Integrity Principles and Best Practices: Recommendations from a Scientific Integrity Consortium.科学诚信原则与最佳实践:科学诚信联盟的建议
Sci Eng Ethics. 2019 Apr;25(2):327-355. doi: 10.1007/s11948-019-00094-3. Epub 2019 Feb 27.
5
Fostering research integrity in sub-Saharan Africa: challenges, opportunities, and recommendations.促进撒哈拉以南非洲地区的研究诚信:挑战、机遇与建议。
Pan Afr Med J. 2022 Dec 7;43:182. doi: 10.11604/pamj.2022.43.182.37804. eCollection 2022.
6
Promoting trust in research and researchers: How open science and research integrity are intertwined.促进对研究和研究人员的信任:开放科学与研究诚信如何相互交织。
BMC Res Notes. 2022 Sep 20;15(1):302. doi: 10.1186/s13104-022-06169-y.
7
What do mentoring and training in the responsible conduct of research have to do with scientists' misbehavior? Findings from a National Survey of NIH-funded scientists.科研行为责任方面的指导与培训和科学家的不当行为有何关系?来自一项对美国国立卫生研究院资助科学家的全国性调查的结果。
Acad Med. 2007 Sep;82(9):853-60. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0b013e31812f764c.
8
First meeting in Asia of the Asia Pacific Research Integrity network.亚太研究诚信网络在亚洲的首次会议。
Account Res. 2020 Feb;27(2):99-106. doi: 10.1080/08989621.2020.1715220. Epub 2020 Jan 14.
9
Bringing scientific rigor to community-developed programs in Hong Kong.将科学严谨性引入香港社区发展项目。
BMC Public Health. 2012 Dec 31;12:1129. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-12-1129.
10
Extending the olive branch.伸出橄榄枝。
J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2013 Oct;8(4):29-36. doi: 10.1525/jer.2013.8.4.28.

引用本文的文献

1
Provenance and Funding of Extremely Cited Biomedical Articles Published Between 2003 and 2024.2003年至2024年间发表的高被引生物医学文章的来源和资金资助情况。
JAMA Health Forum. 2025 Sep 5;6(9):e253045. doi: 10.1001/jamahealthforum.2025.3045.
2
How the Global South is reshaping scholarly communication.全球南方如何重塑学术交流。
Elife. 2025 Sep 1;14:e108426. doi: 10.7554/eLife.108426.
3
Challenging Reward Structures and Organizational Cultures that Propagate Stem Cell Hyperbole.具有挑战性的奖励结构和宣扬干细胞夸张说法的组织文化。

本文引用的文献

1
A manifesto for reproducible science.可重复科学宣言。
Nat Hum Behav. 2017 Jan 10;1(1):0021. doi: 10.1038/s41562-016-0021.
2
Academic criteria for promotion and tenure in biomedical sciences faculties: cross sectional analysis of international sample of universities.生物医学科学教师晋升和终身教职的学术标准:对国际大学样本的横断面分析。
BMJ. 2020 Jun 25;369:m2081. doi: 10.1136/bmj.m2081.
3
Improving the trustworthiness, usefulness, and ethics of biomedical research through an innovative and comprehensive institutional initiative.
Stem Cell Rev Rep. 2025 Aug 18. doi: 10.1007/s12015-025-10955-z.
4
A roadmap to good practice for training supervisors and leadership: a European perspective.培训主管与领导力的良好实践路线图:欧洲视角
Front Res Metr Anal. 2025 Jun 19;10:1531467. doi: 10.3389/frma.2025.1531467. eCollection 2025.
5
Editorial: The integrity of randomized clinical trials: consensus statements from Hong Kong to Cairo.社论:随机临床试验的完整性:从香港到开罗的共识声明
Front Res Metr Anal. 2025 Jun 10;10:1588882. doi: 10.3389/frma.2025.1588882. eCollection 2025.
6
Fostering open science and responsible research practices: A pre-post study.促进开放科学与负责任的研究实践:一项前后对照研究。
F1000Res. 2025 Mar 24;14:318. doi: 10.12688/f1000research.155832.1. eCollection 2025.
7
Methodological challenges and opportunities when studying the course of autism.研究自闭症病程时的方法学挑战与机遇。
Autism. 2025 May 22:13623613251341012. doi: 10.1177/13623613251341012.
8
International initiatives to enhance awareness and uptake of open research in psychology: a systematic mapping review.提高心理学领域开放研究的认知度和采用率的国际倡议:一项系统映射综述
R Soc Open Sci. 2025 Mar 19;12(3):241726. doi: 10.1098/rsos.241726. eCollection 2025 Mar.
9
Improving research transparency with individualized report cards: A feasibility study in clinical trials at a large university medical center.使用个性化报告卡提高研究透明度:大型大学医学中心临床试验的可行性研究。
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2025 Feb 13;25(1):37. doi: 10.1186/s12874-025-02482-9.
10
From impact metrics and open science to communicating research: Journalists' awareness of academic controversies.从影响指标与开放科学到研究成果传播:记者对学术争议的认知
PLoS One. 2025 Jan 27;20(1):e0309274. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0309274. eCollection 2025.
通过创新和全面的机构举措,提高生物医学研究的可信度、有用性和伦理性。
PLoS Biol. 2020 Feb 11;18(2):e3000576. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.3000576. eCollection 2020 Feb.
4
Researchers' perceptions of research misbehaviours: a mixed methods study among academic researchers in Amsterdam.研究人员对研究不当行为的认知:一项针对阿姆斯特丹学术研究人员的混合方法研究。
Res Integr Peer Rev. 2019 Dec 2;4:25. doi: 10.1186/s41073-019-0081-7. eCollection 2019.
5
A Cross-Sectional Analysis of the BC Children's Hospital Cleft Palate Program Waitlist.不列颠哥伦比亚儿童医院腭裂项目等候名单的横断面分析。
Plast Surg (Oakv). 2019 Nov;27(4):311-318. doi: 10.1177/2292550319876664. Epub 2019 Sep 29.
6
Refining animal research: The Animal Study Registry.动物研究的精细化:动物研究注册处。
PLoS Biol. 2019 Oct 15;17(10):e3000463. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.3000463. eCollection 2019 Oct.
7
Evaluating the replicability of social science experiments in Nature and Science between 2010 and 2015.评估 2010 年至 2015 年期间《自然》和《科学》杂志上社会科学实验的可重复性。
Nat Hum Behav. 2018 Sep;2(9):637-644. doi: 10.1038/s41562-018-0399-z. Epub 2018 Aug 27.
8
Open science challenges, benefits and tips in early career and beyond.开放科学在职业生涯早期及以后面临的挑战、获益和技巧。
PLoS Biol. 2019 May 1;17(5):e3000246. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.3000246. eCollection 2019 May.
9
Scientific Integrity Principles and Best Practices: Recommendations from a Scientific Integrity Consortium.科学诚信原则与最佳实践:科学诚信联盟的建议
Sci Eng Ethics. 2019 Apr;25(2):327-355. doi: 10.1007/s11948-019-00094-3. Epub 2019 Feb 27.
10
Engaging with patients on research to inform better care.与患者就研究进行交流,以提供更优质的护理。
CMAJ. 2018 Nov 7;190(Suppl):S6-S8. doi: 10.1503/cmaj.180816.