当前位置：
X-MOL 学术
›
Lancet Psychiatry
›
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.)
Academic oversight in policy research: questions arising from the Sex Offender Treatment Programme study.
The Lancet Psychiatry ( IF 30.8 ) Pub Date : 2019-10-07 , DOI: 10.1016/s2215-0366(19)30374-8 Penelope Brown 1 , Callum Ross 2
The Lancet Psychiatry ( IF 30.8 ) Pub Date : 2019-10-07 , DOI: 10.1016/s2215-0366(19)30374-8 Penelope Brown 1 , Callum Ross 2
Affiliation
|
Research integrity is a subject of global academic importance. Conflicts of interest, preferential funding, and suppression of results are well recognised problems in industry-sponsored research, yet have received relatively little attention in government-funded science. Ignoring these issues poses substantial risks to the public. State interference with research, such as government-imposed restrictions on funding studies into gun control in the USA, stymies advances in understanding risk factors, which in turn has pervasive effects on evidence-based policy making. In the UK, a recent revelation concerning a study exploring treatment for sex offenders has raised urgent questions about independent oversight in government-funded policy research that need to be addressed.
中文翻译：
政策研究的学术监督：《性罪犯待遇计划》研究提出的问题。
研究的完整性是具有全球学术重要性的主题。利益冲突，优惠资金和结果抑制是行业赞助研究中公认的问题，但在政府资助的科学中却很少受到关注。忽略这些问题会对公众构成重大风险。州对研究的干预，例如政府对美国对枪支管制的资金研究施加限制，阻碍了对风险因素的理解，反过来又对基于证据的政策制定产生了普遍影响。在英国，有关一项探索性罪犯待遇的研究的最新发现，引起了有关政府资助的政策研究中独立监督的迫切问题，需要解决。
更新日期：2020-02-21
中文翻译：
政策研究的学术监督：《性罪犯待遇计划》研究提出的问题。
研究的完整性是具有全球学术重要性的主题。利益冲突，优惠资金和结果抑制是行业赞助研究中公认的问题，但在政府资助的科学中却很少受到关注。忽略这些问题会对公众构成重大风险。州对研究的干预，例如政府对美国对枪支管制的资金研究施加限制，阻碍了对风险因素的理解，反过来又对基于证据的政策制定产生了普遍影响。在英国，有关一项探索性罪犯待遇的研究的最新发现，引起了有关政府资助的政策研究中独立监督的迫切问题，需要解决。
京公网安备 11010802027423号