当前位置: X-MOL 学术J Nucl. Med. › 论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
Scientific Fraud, Publication Bias, and Honorary Authorship in Nuclear Medicine
The Journal of Nuclear Medicine ( IF 9.3 ) Pub Date : 2023-02-01 , DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.122.264679
Thomas C Kwee 1 , Maan T Almaghrabi 2 , Robert M Kwee 3
Affiliation  

Our objective was to investigate nuclear medicine scientists’ experience with scientific fraud, publication bias, and honorary authorship. Methods: Corresponding authors who published an article in one of the 15 general nuclear medicine journals (according to Journal Citation Reports) in 2021 received an invitation to participate in a survey on scientific integrity. Results: In total, 254 (12.4%) of 1,897 corresponding authors completed the survey, of whom 11 (4.3%) admitted to having committed scientific fraud and 54 (21.3%) reported having witnessed or suspected scientific fraud by someone in their department in the past 5 y. Publication bias was considered present by 222 (87.4%) respondents, and honorary authorship practices were experienced by 100 (39.4%) respondents. Respondents assigned a median score of 8 (range, 2–10) on a 1- to 10-point scale for their overall confidence in the integrity of published work. On multivariate analysis, researchers in Asia had significantly more confidence in the integrity of published work, with a β-coefficient of 0.983 (95% CI, 0.512–1.454; P < 0.001). A subset of 22 respondents raised additional concerns, mainly about authorship criteria and assignments, the generally poor quality of published studies, and perverse incentives of journals and publishers. Conclusion: Scientific fraud, publication bias, and honorary authorship appear to be nonnegligible practices in nuclear medicine. Overall confidence in the integrity of published work is high, particularly among researchers in Asia.



中文翻译:

核医学中的科学欺诈、出版偏见和名誉作者

我们的目标是调查核医学科学家在科学造假、发表偏倚和名誉作者方面的经历。方法: 2021 年在 15 种普通核医学期刊之一(根据期刊引证报告)发表文章的通讯作者收到了参加科学诚信调查的邀请。结果:总共有 1,897 名通讯作者中有 254 名 (12.4%) 完成了调查,其中 11 名 (4.3%) 承认犯有科学欺诈行为,54 名 (21.3%) 报告曾目睹或怀疑他们部门的某人过去进行过科学欺诈5 岁。222 名 (87.4%) 受访者认为存在发表偏倚,100 名 (39.4%) 受访者经历过名誉作者做法。受访者在 1 到 10 分的量表中为他们对已发表作品的完整性的总体信心分配了 8 分的中位数(范围 2-10)。在多变量分析中,亚洲研究人员对已发表作品的完整性更有信心,β 系数为 0.983(95% CI,0.512–1.454;P< 0.001)。22 名受访者中的一部分提出了额外的担忧,主要是作者身份标准和分配、已发表研究的质量普遍较差以及期刊和出版商的不正当激励措施。结论:科学欺诈、发表偏倚和名誉作者似乎是核医学中不可忽视的做法。对已发表作品的完整性的总体信心很高,尤其是在亚洲的研究人员中。

更新日期:2023-02-01
down
wechat
bug