Fraud and Misconduct in Science: the Stem Cell Seduction: Implications for the Peer-review Process
Overview
Authors
Affiliations
Scientific misconduct and fraud occur in science. The (anonymous) peer review process serves as goalkeeper of scientific quality rather than scientific integrity. In this brief paper we describe some limitations of the peer-review process. We describe the catastrophic facts of the 'Woo-Suk Hwang fraud case' and raise some ethical concerns about the issue. Finally, we pay attention to plagiarism, autoplagiarism and double publications. (Neth Heart J 2009;17:25-9.).
The 1-h fraud detection challenge.
van der Heyden M Naunyn Schmiedebergs Arch Pharmacol. 2021; 394(8):1633-1640.
PMID: 34244820 PMC: 8270772. DOI: 10.1007/s00210-021-02120-3.
Towards a Research Agenda for Promoting Responsible Research Practices.
Tijdink J, Horbach S, Nuijten M, ONeill G J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2021; 16(4):450-460.
PMID: 34037490 PMC: 8458678. DOI: 10.1177/15562646211018916.
The ability of different peer review procedures to flag problematic publications.
Horbach S, Halffman W Scientometrics. 2019; 118(1):339-373.
PMID: 30930504 PMC: 6404393. DOI: 10.1007/s11192-018-2969-2.
Stem cell in urology-are we at the cusp of a new era?.
Panda A Transl Androl Urol. 2018; 7(4):653-658.
PMID: 30211055 PMC: 6127559. DOI: 10.21037/tau.2018.04.07.
Modelling science trustworthiness under publish or perish pressure.
Grimes D, Bauch C, Ioannidis J R Soc Open Sci. 2018; 5(1):171511.
PMID: 29410855 PMC: 5792932. DOI: 10.1098/rsos.171511.