RESEARCH NOTES

Pdf version

 

COMMON ETHICAL ISSUES IN RESEARCH AND PUBLICATION

3. Authorship

There is no universally agreed definition of authorship.⁶ It is generally agreed that an author should have made substantial contribution to the intellectual content, including conceptualising and designing the study; acquiring, analysing and interpreting the data. The author should also take responsibility to certify that the manuscript represents valid work and take public responsibility for the work. Finally, an author is usually involved in drafting or revising the manuscript, as well as approving the submitted manuscript. Data collection, editing of grammar and language, and other routine works by itself, do not deserve an authorship.

It is crucial to decide early on in the planning of a research who will be credited as authors, as contributors, and who will be acknowledged. It is also advisable to read carefully the “Advice to Authors” of the target journal which may serve as a guide to the issue of authorship.

4. Conflicts of interest

This happens when researchers have interests that are not fully apparent and that may influence their judgments on what is published. These conflicts include personal, commercial, political, academic or financial interest. Financial interests may include employment, research funding, stock or share ownership, payment for lecture or travel, consultancies and company support for staff. This issue is especially pertinent in biomedical research where a substantial number of clinical trials are funded by pharmaceutical company.

Such interests, where relevant, should be discussed in the early stage of research. The researchers need to take extra effort to ensure that their conflicts of interest do not influence the methodology and outcome of the research. It would be useful to consult an independent researcher, or Ethics Committee, on this issue if in doubt. When publishing, these conflicts of interest should be declared to editors, and readers will judge for themselves whether the research findings are trustworthy.

5. Redundant publication and plagiarism

Redundant publication occurs when two or more papers, without full cross reference, share the same hypothesis, data, discussion points, or conclusions. However, previous publication of an abstract during the proceedings of meetings does not preclude subsequent submission for publication, but full disclosure should be made at the time of submission. This is also known as self-plagiarism. In the increasing competitive environment where appointments, promotions and grant applications are strongly influenced by publication record, researchers are under intense pressure to publish, and a growing minority is seeking to bump up their CV through dishonest means.⁷

On the other hand, plagiarism ranges from unreferenced use of others’ published and unpublished ideas, including research grant applications to submission under “new” authorship of a complete paper, sometimes in different language.

Therefore, it is important to disclose all sources of information, and if large amount of other people’s written or illustrative materials is to be used, permission must be sought.

CONCLUSION

It is the duty of the researcher to ensure that research is conducted in an ethical and responsible manner from planning to publication. Researchers and authors should familiarise themselves with these principles and follows them strictly. Any potential ethical issues in research and publication should be discussed openly within the research team. If in doubt, it is advisable to consult the respective institutional review board (IRB) for their expert opinions.  

REFERENCES

1. Human D, Fluss SS. The World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: historical and contemporary perspectives. World Medical Association, 2001 [PDF]
2. Lexchin J, Bero LA, Djulbegovic B, Clark O. Pharmaceutical industry sponsorship and research outcome and quality. BMJ. 2003;326:1167-70 [PubMed]
3. World Medical association. Declaration of Helsinki: Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects. Updated 2004. [HTML] [PDF]
4. Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Guidelines on good publication and the Code of Conduct. 2005 [HTML]
5. Smith R. Medical journals are an extension of the marketing arm of pharmaceutical companies. PLoS Med. 2005;2:100-2 [PubMed]
6. Medical Research Council. MRC Guidelines for good clinical practice in clinical trials. London: MRC, 1998 [HTML]
7. Giles J. Taking on the cheats. Nature. 2005; 435: 258-9 [PubMed]

<< Page 1 | 2 | 3 >>