[Misconduct in clinical scientific investigations]

Area of Science:

• Medical Ethics
• Research Integrity
• Clinical Research

Context:

• Misconduct in clinical scientific research includes data falsification, plagiarism, and over-interpretation.
• Motivations stem from prestige, financial gain, time pressures, and conflicts of interest, exacerbated by the 'publish or perish' culture.
• A 'gray zone' exists where pharmaceutical industry influence can lead to biased publications, with the frequency of misconduct generally underestimated.

Purpose:

• To identify key forms of misconduct in clinical scientific research.
• To explore the underlying motives and contributing factors, such as industry influence and academic pressures.
• To propose preventative measures and discuss the roles of regulatory bodies and academic institutions.

Summary:

• Major forms of misconduct are falsifying results, plagiarism, and over-interpretation, driven by factors like prestige, money, and industry influence.
• The 'publish or perish' phenomenon and industry ties contribute to biased research and underreporting of misconduct.
• Preventative strategies include education, enhanced ethical committee powers, realistic research funding, and independent clinical project support.

Impact:

• Highlights the underestimation of research misconduct and the need for more robust detection and investigation mechanisms.
• Proposes multi-faceted solutions including enhanced education, strengthened ethical review processes, and independent research funding.
• Suggests a potential role for national academies of medicine in addressing misconduct and promoting research integrity.