Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.
Institute of Medical Humanities, Peking University Health Science Center, Beijing, China.
Account Res. 2022 Jul;29(5):294-308. doi: 10.1080/08989621.2021.1920014. Epub 2021 May 4.
Variances in perceived standards regarding research integrity appear to exist between China and the U.S. An established joint institute for translational and clinical research between one Chinese and one U.S. health system provides a valuable venue in which to evaluate these perceptions better. We therefore undertook a survey of 209 physicians at the two institutions in 2013-14. The vast majority of physicians from both institutions understood the necessity of obtaining informed consent from research participants, the need to provide a description of the risks of participation, and the voluntary nature of research participation. However, there were differences in responses between the two sites in willingness to report plagiarism (U.S. 95.65% vs. Chinese 40.21%; p < .0001) and data falsification (U.S. 100% vs. Chinese 81.25%; p < .0001) and in willingness to attend biomedical industry-funded promotional events (U.S. 11.0% vs. Chinese 74.0%; p < .0001). When planning to conduct collaborative clinical research across cultures, particularly when uncertainty regarding the similarity of research cultures exists, exploration of cultural and ethical norms in research may be informative regarding educational needs and the risks of research and academic misconduct.
中美两国在科研诚信标准方面的认知似乎存在差异。一家中国医疗机构与一家美国医疗机构共建了一家转化与临床研究联合机构，为更好地评估这些认知提供了一个有价值的平台。因此，我们于 2013-2014 年对这两个机构的 209 名医生进行了调查。来自两个机构的绝大多数医生都理解从研究参与者那里获得知情同意的必要性、需要描述参与的风险以及研究参与的自愿性质。然而，在报告剽窃（美国 95.65%比中国 40.21%；p < 0.0001）和数据伪造（美国 100%比中国 81.25%；p < 0.0001）以及参加生物医学行业资助的推广活动的意愿（美国 11.0%比中国 74.0%；p < 0.0001）方面，两个地点的医生存在差异。在计划开展跨文化的临床合作研究时，特别是当对研究文化的相似性存在不确定性时，对研究中的文化和伦理规范进行探索，可能有助于了解教育需求以及研究和学术不端行为的风险。
