Bosch X, Hernández, Pericas JM et al. Misconduct policies in medical journals. PloS ONE 2012;7(12):e51928
(doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0051928)
This study assessed the prevalence and content policies of the most influential biomedical journals on misconduct and procedures for handling and responding to allegations of misconduct. The results showed that one-third of journals provided explicit definitions of misconduct and less than half procedures for responding. There were significant differences in policies and procedures between publishers. The authors recommend that ethical guidelines should be easily accessible and address research integrity topics including misconduct policies.
http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0051928
(doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0051928)
This study assessed the prevalence and content policies of the most influential biomedical journals on misconduct and procedures for handling and responding to allegations of misconduct. The results showed that one-third of journals provided explicit definitions of misconduct and less than half procedures for responding. There were significant differences in policies and procedures between publishers. The authors recommend that ethical guidelines should be easily accessible and address research integrity topics including misconduct policies.
http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0051928
Comments