• 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

迈向促进负责任研究实践的研究议程。

Towards a Research Agenda for Promoting Responsible Research Practices.

机构信息

Department of Ethics, Law and Humanities, 1209Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.

Department of Philosophy, 404761Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.

出版信息

J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2021 Oct;16(4):450-460. doi: 10.1177/15562646211018916. Epub 2021 May 26.

DOI:10.1177/15562646211018916
PMID:34037490
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8458678/
Abstract

This opinion piece aims to inform future research funding programs on responsible research practices (RRP) based on three specific objectives: (1) to give a sketch of the current international discussion on responsible research practices (RRPs); (2) to give an overview of current initiatives and already obtained results regarding RRP; and (3) to give an overview of potential future needs for research on RRP. In this opinion piece, we have used seven iterative methodological steps (including literature review, ranking, and sorting exercises) to create the proposed research agenda. We identified six main themes that we believe need attention in future research: (1) responsible evaluation of research and researchers, (2) the influence of open science and transparency on RRP, (3) research on responsible mentoring, supervision, and role modeling, (4) the effect of education and training on RRP, (5) checking for reproducibility, and (6) responsible and fair peer review. These themes have in common that they address aspects of research that are mostly on the level of the scientific system, more than on the level of the individual researcher. Some current initiatives are already gathering substantial empirical evidence to start filling these gaps. We believe that with sufficient support from all relevant stakeholders, more progress can be made.

摘要

这篇观点文章旨在基于三个具体目标,为负责任的研究实践(RRP)的未来研究资助计划提供信息:(1)概述当前关于负责任的研究实践(RRP)的国际讨论;(2)概述 RRP 的当前举措和已经取得的成果;(3)概述 RRP 研究的潜在未来需求。在这篇观点文章中,我们使用了七个迭代的方法步骤(包括文献综述、排名和分类练习)来创建拟议的研究议程。我们确定了六个主要主题,我们认为这些主题需要在未来的研究中得到关注:(1)负责任的研究和研究人员评估;(2)开放科学和透明度对 RRP 的影响;(3)负责任的指导、监督和角色建模的研究;(4)教育和培训对 RRP 的影响;(5)检查可重复性;(6)负责任和公平的同行评审。这些主题的共同点是,它们都涉及到研究的各个方面,这些方面主要是在科学系统层面上,而不是在单个研究人员层面上。一些当前的举措已经在收集大量的经验证据,以开始填补这些空白。我们相信,在所有相关利益相关者的充分支持下,可以取得更多的进展。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/64ad/8458678/6544306ee5f5/10.1177_15562646211018916-fig2.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/64ad/8458678/2b26a306de33/10.1177_15562646211018916-fig1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/64ad/8458678/6544306ee5f5/10.1177_15562646211018916-fig2.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/64ad/8458678/2b26a306de33/10.1177_15562646211018916-fig1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/64ad/8458678/6544306ee5f5/10.1177_15562646211018916-fig2.jpg

相似文献

1
Towards a Research Agenda for Promoting Responsible Research Practices.迈向促进负责任研究实践的研究议程。
J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2021 Oct;16(4):450-460. doi: 10.1177/15562646211018916. Epub 2021 May 26.
2
The future of Cochrane Neonatal.考克兰新生儿协作网的未来。
Early Hum Dev. 2020 Nov;150:105191. doi: 10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2020.105191. Epub 2020 Sep 12.
3
Primary Care Research Team Assessment (PCRTA): development and evaluation.基层医疗研究团队评估(PCRTA):开发与评估
Occas Pap R Coll Gen Pract. 2002 Feb(81):iii-vi, 1-72.
4
Stakeholders' perspectives on research integrity training practices: a qualitative study.利益相关者对研究诚信培训实践的看法:一项定性研究。
BMC Med Ethics. 2021 May 28;22(1):67. doi: 10.1186/s12910-021-00637-z.
5
Beyond the black stump: rapid reviews of health research issues affecting regional, rural and remote Australia.超越黑木树:影响澳大利亚地区、农村和偏远地区的健康研究问题的快速综述。
Med J Aust. 2020 Dec;213 Suppl 11:S3-S32.e1. doi: 10.5694/mja2.50881.
6
Prevalence of responsible research practices among academics in The Netherlands.荷兰学术界负责任研究行为的流行情况。
F1000Res. 2022 Apr 28;11:471. doi: 10.12688/f1000research.110664.2. eCollection 2022.
7
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.
8
Taiwanese Researchers' Perceptions of Questionable Authorship Practices: An Exploratory Study.台湾研究人员对可疑署名行为的认知:一项探索性研究。
Sci Eng Ethics. 2020 Jun;26(3):1499-1530. doi: 10.1007/s11948-020-00180-x. Epub 2020 Jan 24.
9
A grassroots approach to peer support by the Danish Reproducibility Network.丹麦可重复性网络的基层同行支持方法。
BMC Res Notes. 2024 Sep 10;17(1):256. doi: 10.1186/s13104-024-06912-7.
10
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.

引用本文的文献

1
Quantity over quality of publications: Are we using the right metrics to judge author's productivity and impact in biomedical research?出版物数量优于质量:我们是否使用了正确的指标来衡量生物医学研究中作者的生产力和影响力?
J Postgrad Med. 2024 Jul 1;70(3):154-161. doi: 10.4103/jpgm.jpgm_343_24. Epub 2024 Aug 9.
2
A scoping review on what constitutes a good research culture.关于何为良好研究文化的范围综述。
F1000Res. 2024 Oct 14;13:324. doi: 10.12688/f1000research.147599.1. eCollection 2024.
3
Exploring the dimensions of responsible research systems and cultures: a scoping review.

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
Explaining variance in perceived research misbehavior: results from a survey among academic researchers in Amsterdam.解释感知到的研究不当行为的差异:阿姆斯特丹学术研究人员的调查结果。
Res Integr Peer Rev. 2021 May 3;6(1):7. doi: 10.1186/s41073-021-00110-w.
3
Research integrity: nine ways to move from talk to walk.研究诚信:从空谈走向行动的九种方法。
探索负责任的研究体系与文化的维度:一项范围综述
R Soc Open Sci. 2024 Jan 17;11(1):230624. doi: 10.1098/rsos.230624. eCollection 2024 Jan.
4
Responsible research practices could be more strongly endorsed by Australian university codes of research conduct.澳大利亚大学的研究行为准则可以更有力地支持负责任的研究实践。
Res Integr Peer Rev. 2023 Jun 6;8(1):5. doi: 10.1186/s41073-023-00129-1.
5
Meta-research evaluating redundancy and use of systematic reviews when planning new studies in health research: a scoping review.元研究评估健康研究中新研究规划时系统评价的冗余和使用:范围综述。
Syst Rev. 2022 Nov 15;11(1):241. doi: 10.1186/s13643-022-02096-y.
Nature. 2020 Oct;586(7829):358-360. doi: 10.1038/d41586-020-02847-8.
4
Open science, communal culture, and women's participation in the movement to improve science.开放科学、社群文化以及女性在改善科学运动中的参与。
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2020 Sep 29;117(39):24154-24164. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1921320117. Epub 2020 Sep 14.
5
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.
6
Verification Reports: A new article type at Cortex.验证报告:《大脑皮层》的一种新文章类型。
Cortex. 2020 Aug;129:A1-A3. doi: 10.1016/j.cortex.2020.04.020. Epub 2020 Jun 18.
7
Luxembourg's approach to research integrity during the COVID-19 pandemic.卢森堡在 COVID-19 大流行期间的研究诚信方法。
Account Res. 2020 Aug;27(6):396-400. doi: 10.1080/08989621.2020.1778473. Epub 2020 Jun 16.
8
Retraction-Hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine with or without a macrolide for treatment of COVID-19: a multinational registry analysis.撤稿——羟氯喹或氯喹联合或不联合大环内酯类药物治疗新型冠状病毒肺炎:一项多国注册研究分析
Lancet. 2020 Jun 13;395(10240):1820. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)31324-6. Epub 2020 Jun 5.
9
Conducting Clinical Research During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Protecting Scientific Integrity.在2019冠状病毒病大流行期间开展临床研究:维护科学诚信。
JAMA. 2020 Jul 7;324(1):33-34. doi: 10.1001/jama.2020.9286.
10
The limitations to our understanding of peer review.我们对同行评审理解的局限性。
Res Integr Peer Rev. 2020 Apr 30;5:6. doi: 10.1186/s41073-020-00092-1. eCollection 2020.