Hoffmann, R. A wiki for the life sciences where authorship matters. Nature Genetics (2008)

Editor

Personal info

View

About

Terms

Javascript disabled

Please enable Javascript support in your browser to use this application.

Instructions on how to enable JavaScript on different browsers can be found here: http://www.google.com/support/bin/answer.py?answer=23852.

[edit this page]

MeSH Review:

Scientific Misconduct

Dooley, J.J. et al., Garfield, E. et al., Sox, H.C. et al., Claxton, L.D., Wang, J., et al.

Claxton, Dooley, Kerch,

Welcome! If you are familiar with the subject of this article, you can contribute to this open access knowledge base by deleting incorrect information, restructuring or completely rewriting any text. Read more.

High impact information on Scientific Misconduct

Scientific misconduct. Wellcome rules widen the net [1].
Scientific misconduct: Chinese journals pledge crackdown [2].
Scientific fraud probed at AAAS meeting [3].
The goal of this study was to determine the research impact of scientific fraud through citation analysis of 20 Breuning publications, using the 1980 to 1988 Science Citation Index and Social Sciences Citation Index [4].
Scientific authorship. Part 1. A window into scientific fraud [5]?

Gene context of Scientific Misconduct

Although the number of cases of scientific misconduct is uncertain (only the NIH and the NSF keep formal records), the costs are high in terms of the integrity of the scientific record, diversions from research to investigate allegations, ruined careers of those eventually exonerated, and erosion of public confidence in science [6].
This mechanism is far from perfect, as shown by a case history of scientific fraud perpetrated by Eric Poehlman, PhD [7].

References

Scientific misconduct. Wellcome rules widen the net. Koenig, R. Science (2001) [Pubmed]
Scientific misconduct: Chinese journals pledge crackdown. Wang, J. Science (1999) [Pubmed]
Scientific fraud probed at AAAS meeting. Smith, R.J. Science (1985) [Pubmed]
The impact of fraudulent research on the scientific literature. The Stephen E. Breuning case. Garfield, E., Welljams-Dorof, A. JAMA (1990) [Pubmed]
Scientific authorship. Part 1. A window into scientific fraud? Claxton, L.D. Mutat. Res. (2005) [Pubmed]
Evolving research misconduct policies and their significance for physical scientists. Dooley, J.J., Kerch, H.M. Science and engineering ethics. (2000) [Pubmed]
Research misconduct, retraction, and cleansing the medical literature: lessons from the Poehlman case. Sox, H.C., Rennie, D. Ann. Intern. Med. (2006) [Pubmed]

Contributions to this collaborative article are from individual authors of WikiGenes or mined by the WikiGenes Data Mining Engine from MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.About WikiGenes Open Access Licence Privacy Policy Terms of Use apsburg

The world's first wiki where authorship really matters (Nature Genetics, 2008). Due credit and reputation for authors. Imagine a global collaborative knowledge base for original thoughts. Search thousands of articles and collaborate with scientists around the globe.

Editor

Share