[Beyond quantity: rethinking quality and integrity in scientific research]

Scientific publications have been suffering from a credibility crisis for years. This is the consequence of an excess of quantity in the production of articles produced for the sole purpose of advancing one's career and acquiring new funding to produce new studies and, consequently, new publications. To the problems of quantity are added those of quality: useless research results in scientific literature of little value. The preventive filter - entrusted to the peer review system - continues to prove insufficient to prevent the publication of useless or, increasingly, fraudulent articles. The method of critical review process should be radically reconsidered, as should the tools for measuring the impact of scientific articles: impact factors and other citation indices have proved incapable of giving an insight into the quality of what is published. The increased attention being paid to the scientific publication crisis can be a useful deterrent to improve quality and limit fraudulent behaviour. New generations of clinicians and researchers must be educated to respect the rules, and stricter and more timely penalties are needed for those who do not meet the standards that the scientific community has established over the years. More generally, the assessment of the quality of scientific production, and not its quantity, should inspire the evaluation of professional profiles when allocating new funding and selecting candidates for academic positions. Finally, journalism schools and masters' degrees in science communication must train new professionals capable of carrying out investigative journalism, which must be intensified in order to bring to light opportunistic and fraudulent behaviour.