-
Tytuł:
-
When is lack of scientific integrity a reason for retracting a paper? A case study.
-
Autorzy:
-
Fiedorowicz JG; Department of Psychiatry, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. Electronic address: .
Levenson JL; Department of Psychiatry, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, Virginia, USA.
Leentjens AFG; Department of Psychiatry, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
-
Źródło:
-
Journal of psychosomatic research [J Psychosom Res] 2021 May; Vol. 144, pp. 110412. Date of Electronic Publication: 2021 Mar 02.
-
Typ publikacji:
-
Journal Article
-
Język:
-
English
-
Imprint Name(s):
-
Publication: Oxford : Pergamon Press
Original Publication: London.
-
MeSH Terms:
-
Periodicals as Topic*
Retraction of Publication as Topic*
Scientific Misconduct*
Publishing/*ethics
Humans ; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic ; Research Design/standards
-
Contributed Indexing:
-
Keywords: Blinding; Ethical reflection; Homeopathy; Randomized control trial; Retraction; Scientific Misconduct
-
Entry Date(s):
-
Date Created: 20210317 Date Completed: 20210616 Latest Revision: 20210616
-
Update Code:
-
20240105
-
DOI:
-
10.1016/j.jpsychores.2021.110412
-
PMID:
-
33730636
-
Objective: The journal received a request to retract a paper reporting the results of a triple-blind randomized placebo-controlled trial. The present and immmediate past editors expand on the journal's decision not to retract this paper in spite of undisputable evidence of scientific misconduct on behalf of one of the investigators.
Methods: The editors present an ethical reflection on the request to retract this randomized clinical trial with consideration of relevant guidelines from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) applied to the unique contextual issues of this case.
Results: In this case, scientific misconduct by a blinded provider of a homeopathy intervention attempted to undermine the study blind. As part of the study, the integrity of the study blind was assessed. Neither participants nor homeopaths were able to identify whether the participant was assigned to homeopathic medicine or placebo. Central to the decision not to retract the paper was the fact that the rigorous scientific design provided evidence that the outcome of the study was not affected by the misconduct. The misconduct itself was thought to be insufficient reason to retract the paper.
Conclusion: Retracting a paper of which the outcome is still valid was in itself considered unethical, as it takes away the opportunity to benefit from its results, rendering the whole study useless. In such cases, scientific misconduct is better handled through other professional channels.
(Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)
