Andersen D, Axelsen N H, Riis P
Surgical Department K, Odense Hospital, Statens Seruminstitut, Copenhagen.
Dan Med Bull. 1993 Apr;40(2):250-2.
Scientific dishonesty has been the subject of much public interest in recent years. Although the problem has had a low profile in Denmark, there is no reason to believe that it is non-existent. Several preconditions known to be important prevail here as well as in other countries, such as pressure to publish and severe competition for research grants and senior academic positions. The Danish Medical Research Council (DMRC) decided to respond to this problem by preparing a report on scientific dishonesty with suggestions to the research institutions on rules for good scientific practice and procedures for investigation of suspected dishonesty. To this end, an investigatory system was suggested. The system should consist of two regional committees and one national committee. They should be headed by high court judges and experienced health sciences researchers as members. The committees will investigate cases reported to them and conclude on whether dishonesty has been established and on whether the scientific work should be retracted. Sanctions shall remain the task of the institutions. Preventive measures comprise open access to and a long storage period for scientific data.
近年来，科研不端行为一直是公众广泛关注的话题。尽管该问题在丹麦并不受关注，但没有理由认为它不存在。与其他国家一样，丹麦也存在几个已知的重要前提条件，比如发表论文的压力以及在研究经费和高级学术职位方面的激烈竞争。丹麦医学研究理事会（DMRC）决定通过编写一份关于科研不端行为的报告来应对这一问题，并就良好科研实践规则和对疑似不端行为的调查程序向研究机构提出建议。为此，有人建议建立一个调查系统。该系统应由两个地区委员会和一个国家委员会组成。它们应由高等法院法官领导，并由经验丰富的健康科学研究人员担任成员。这些委员会将对向其报告的案件进行调查，并就是否认定存在不端行为以及是否应撤回科研成果作出结论。制裁措施仍由各机构负责。预防措施包括科学数据的开放获取和长期保存。
