Desonestidade acadêmica em pesquisas e publicações!!!

quinta-feira, outubro 04, 2012

89%: Percentage of cancer research "landmark papers" from "top journals" which could not be replicated (47 out of 53).1

417: Number of citations for the 47 unreproducible papers.1

36%: Percentage of scientists who admit engaging in questionable research practices or fraud.2

$216,884: Amount of an NSF grant to study "Why politicians make vague statements".3

75%: Percentage of retracted drug studies which were due to fraud.4

32%: Percentage of retracted papers that are never noted as being retracted.5

$500,000: Cost of investigating a single instance of scientific misconduct.6

>50% of claimed research findings are false.7

86%: Percentage of scientists who admit to witnessing their peers commit fraud or questionable research practices.2

$1,600,000,000: Taxpayer dollars spent on alternative medicine research such as the effect of magnets on arthritis and whether lavender and lemon scents promote healing.8

15%: Percentage of research trainees who said they'd be willing to omit or fabricate data to win a grant or publish a paper.9

47%: Percentage of addiction researchers who reported knowledge of research misconduct.10

$100,000,000: Direct cost of scientific misconduct in the U.S. per year.6

1) Begley & Ellis Nature 483, 531–533, 2012

2) Fanelli D (2009) How Many Scientists Fabricate and Falsify Research? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Survey Data. PLoS ONE 4(5): e5738.


4) Samp JC, Schumock GT, Pickard AS. Retracted publications in the drug literature. Pharmacotherapy. 2012 Jul;32(7):586-95

5) Steen, R.G., J Med Ethics doi:10.1136/jme.2010.040923

6) Michalek AM, Hutson AD, Wicher CP, Trump DL (2010) The Costs and Underappreciated Consequences of Research Misconduct: A Case Study. PLoS Med 7(8): e1000318.

7) Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2005). "Why Most Published Research Findings Are False". PLoS Medicine 2 (8): e124.


9) Kalichman MW, Friedman PJ (1992): A pilot study of biomedical trainees' perceptions concerning research ethics. Academic Medicine 67: 769-775.

10) May C, Campbell S, Doyle H (1998) Research misconduct: A pilot study of British addiction researchers. Addiction Research 6: 371–373.