Research misconduct in clinical research--the American experience and response

Research misconduct in the United States has occurred sporadically since 1961 in the laboratories of some of our most distinguished scientists. In view of the enormous number of research grants funded, cases of this kind are relatively uncommon, but have none the less attracted governmental supervision and calls for reform. The scientific community, universities and government have addressed the issue in various ways and changes have been proposed and some actually instituted. In view of human nature, no one seriously believes that dishonesty in research can be prevented to any greater extent than in any other human activity. However, some practices may discourage and mitigate such occurrences. These include: education in sound laboratory research practices, a fair distribution of authorship assignment, and adequate supervision of research personnel including appropriate reviewing of primary data. Other measures which might be considered include: an adequate check of the credentials of all new personnel, audits for clinical research, especially for those involving significant numbers of patients and multiple institutions, and the introduction of quality control concepts into research procedures. The hope is that the senior individual scientist responsible for the quality and integrity of the research will institute such measures as needed, and that institutional and government supervision will not interfere with the creative process.