This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Joel J. Nobel, MD

JAMA. 1990;263(10):1435-1437.

Abstract
Only 2 medical schools in the United States and Canada of 133 that responded to a survey have policy guidelines that address most of the significant ethical and procedural issues related to misconduct and fraud in biomedical research. Some nonacademic research environments have superior guidelines that offer useful models and deserve examination. Prevention of misconduct and fraud in biomedical research and reporting requires thoughtful, proactive change by academic and clinical institutions. While the causes of misconduct and fraud may be sufficiently complex to engender long debate, the methods for minimizing it are relatively straightforward and start with a clear statement of values and acceptance of responsibility. Otherwise, the failure of the biomedicla research community to meet this challenge forthrightly is soon likely to lead to damaging intervention by government agencies and elected officials. The time to act is now.

(JAMA. 1990;263:1435-1437)

Author Affiliations
From ECRI, Plymouth Meeting, Pa.

Footnotes
Presented at The First International Congress on Peer Review in Biomedical Publication, Chicago, III, May 10-12, 1989.

Reprint requests to ECRI, 5200 Butler Pike, Plymouth Meeting, PA 19462(Dr Nobel).

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Institutional addiction to tobacco
COHEN et al.
Tobacco Control 1999;8:70-74.
FULL TEXT  

Scientific Misconduct in Environmental Science and Toxicology
Nigg and Radulescu
JAMA 1994;272:168-170.
ABSTRACT