• 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

相似文献

1
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.
2
Interventions to prevent misconduct and promote integrity in research and publication.预防科研与出版领域不当行为并促进诚信的干预措施。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 Apr 4;4(4):MR000038. doi: 10.1002/14651858.MR000038.pub2.
3
Awareness and Perception About Research Ethics and Misconduct Among the Teaching Staff of Health Colleges, Jazan University, Saudi Arabia.沙特阿拉伯吉赞大学健康学院教职员工对研究伦理与不当行为的认知和看法
Cureus. 2023 Aug 12;15(8):e43382. doi: 10.7759/cureus.43382. eCollection 2023 Aug.
4
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.
5
Questionable research practices of medical and dental faculty in Pakistan - a confession.巴基斯坦医学和牙科学教师可疑的研究行为 - 自白。
BMC Med Ethics. 2024 Jan 31;25(1):11. doi: 10.1186/s12910-024-01004-4.
6
Knowledge of scientific misconduct in publication among medical students.医学生对发表中的科研不端行为的认知。
Educ Health (Abingdon). 2017 May-Aug;30(2):140-145. doi: 10.4103/efh.EfH_221_16.
7
Factors associated with scientific misconduct and questionable research practices in health professions education.与健康职业教育中科研不端行为和有问题的研究实践相关的因素。
Perspect Med Educ. 2019 Apr;8(2):74-82. doi: 10.1007/s40037-019-0501-x.
8
Knowledge and attitudes of Chinese medical postgraduates toward research ethics and research ethics committees: a cross-sectional study.中国医学研究生对研究伦理和研究伦理委员会的知识和态度:一项横断面研究。
BMC Med Educ. 2023 Jun 28;23(1):482. doi: 10.1186/s12909-023-04459-y.
9
Knowledge, attitudes and practices related to healthcare ethics among medical and dental postgraduate students in south India.印度南部医学和牙科研究生对医疗保健伦理的认知、态度及行为
Indian J Med Ethics. 2014 Apr 1;11(2):99-104. doi: 10.20529/IJME.2014.025.
10
Knowledge and attitudes of physicians toward research ethics and scientific misconduct in Lebanon.黎巴嫩医生对研究伦理和科学不端行为的认知和态度。
BMC Med Ethics. 2020 May 14;21(1):39. doi: 10.1186/s12910-020-00475-5.

引用本文的文献

1
Perception of Plagiarism Among Medical Postgraduate Students: An Observational Study.医学研究生对抄袭的认知:一项观察性研究。
Cureus. 2024 Jul 14;16(7):e64513. doi: 10.7759/cureus.64513. eCollection 2024 Jul.

本文引用的文献

1
Questionable Research Practices and Misconduct Among Norwegian Researchers.挪威研究人员中存在可疑的研究行为和不当行为。
Sci Eng Ethics. 2021 Dec 21;28(1):2. doi: 10.1007/s11948-021-00351-4.
2
Survey on the Research Misconduct and Questionable Research Practices of Medical Students, PhD Students, and Supervisors at the Zagreb School of Medicine in Croatia.克罗地亚萨格勒布医学院医学生、博士生和导师的科研不端行为和可疑研究实践调查。
J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2021 Oct;16(4):435-449. doi: 10.1177/15562646211033727. Epub 2021 Jul 26.
3
Prevalence of Research Misconduct and Questionable Research Practices: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.科研不端行为和可疑研究实践的流行率:系统评价和荟萃分析。
Sci Eng Ethics. 2021 Jun 29;27(4):41. doi: 10.1007/s11948-021-00314-9.
4
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.
5
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.
6
Scientific Misconduct: A Global Concern.科学不端行为:全球关注的问题。
J Obstet Gynaecol India. 2018 Oct;68(5):331-335. doi: 10.1007/s13224-018-1175-8. Epub 2018 Sep 5.
7
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.
8
Knowledge of scientific misconduct in publication among medical students.医学生对发表中的科研不端行为的认知。
Educ Health (Abingdon). 2017 May-Aug;30(2):140-145. doi: 10.4103/efh.EfH_221_16.
9
Academic Research in the 21st Century: Maintaining Scientific Integrity in a Climate of Perverse Incentives and Hypercompetition.21世纪的学术研究:在不当激励和过度竞争环境下保持科学诚信
Environ Eng Sci. 2017 Jan 1;34(1):51-61. doi: 10.1089/ees.2016.0223.
10
Scientific misconduct: a perspective from India.科学不端行为:来自印度的视角。
Med Health Care Philos. 2015 May;18(2):177-84. doi: 10.1007/s11019-014-9603-8.

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

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.

作者信息

Khot Anant, Chindhalore Chaitali A, Naikwadi Akram

机构信息

Pharmacology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Nagpur, IND.

Pharmacology and Therapeutics, Bijapur Lingayat District Educational (BLDE) Shri B. M. Patil Hospital, Medical College and Research Center, Vijayapura, IND.

出版信息

Cureus. 2024 Apr 28;16(4):e59200. doi: 10.7759/cureus.59200. eCollection 2024 Apr.

DOI:10.7759/cureus.59200
PMID:38807845
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11131433/
Abstract

Introduction Research integrity is an active adherence to the ethical principles and professional standards essential for the responsible practice of research. Research or scientific misconduct stands like child abuse today. The survey of National Institutes of Health (NIH)-funded scientists calculated an absolute minimum of 2325 incidents of scientific misconduct per year. A report has also shown that Iran (6.60), India (5.68), Turkey (5.38), South Korea (3.59), and China (2.00) had higher ratios of publication misconduct to distrust data or interpretations than other countries. Hence, to determine the knowledge, attitude, and practices (KAPs) of the research integrity/scientific misconduct among the faculty and postgraduates working in the medical colleges in North Karnataka (NK) and Central India (CI), this study has been carried out. Methods It is a web-based, cross-sectional study carried out with the use of Google Forms (Google, Mountain View, California). A pretested, unstructured questionnaire consisting of 25 questions was posted in the way of a link to the faculty and postgraduates working in various disciplines within the colleges of NK and CI either by using an e-mail or other social platforms like WhatsApp. Institutional Ethics Committee approval was obtained in both regions before conducting the survey. Results A total of 146 participants responded to the e-questionnaire posted to them. Participants from CI displayed better awareness in several areas compared to NK. Citing articles and/ or materials that have not been read is the common questionable research practice (QRP) they have come across, as mentioned by participants in both groups. Discussion The study reveals a moderate level of knowledge and variable attitudes toward research integrity. The "publish or perish" culture is a major contributor to misconduct. Training and awareness programs are needed to enhance ethical research practices. Conclusion This study highlights the need for improved education and policy implementation to uphold research integrity in medical colleges, emphasizing the role of academic culture in shaping ethical research practices.

摘要

引言

研究诚信是积极遵守负责任的研究实践所必需的伦理原则和专业标准。如今,研究或科学不端行为就如同虐待儿童一样恶劣。美国国立卫生研究院(NIH)资助的科学家调查显示,每年科学不端行为事件绝对最少有2325起。一份报告还表明,伊朗(6.60)、印度(5.68)、土耳其(5.38)、韩国(3.59)和中国(2.00)在出版不当行为与对数据或解释的不信任方面的比例高于其他国家。因此,为了确定北卡纳塔克邦(NK)和印度中部(CI)医学院的教职员工和研究生对研究诚信/科学不端行为的知识、态度和实践情况,开展了本研究。

方法

这是一项基于网络的横断面研究,使用谷歌表单(谷歌公司,加利福尼亚州山景城)进行。一份经过预测试的、包含25个问题的非结构化问卷通过电子邮件或WhatsApp等其他社交平台以链接的方式发送给NK和CI各学院不同学科的教职员工和研究生。在两个地区进行调查之前均获得了机构伦理委员会的批准。

结果

共有146名参与者回复了发送给他们的电子问卷。与NK相比,CI的参与者在几个方面表现出了更好的认知。两组参与者都提到,引用未阅读过的文章和/或材料是他们遇到的常见可疑研究行为(QRP)。

讨论

该研究揭示了对研究诚信的中等水平的知识以及不同的态度。“不发表就出局”的文化是不当行为的主要促成因素。需要开展培训和提高认识的项目以加强符合伦理的研究实践。

结论

本研究强调了在医学院改进教育和政策实施以维护研究诚信的必要性,强调了学术文化在塑造符合伦理的研究实践中的作用。