Importance Of Research Ethics Research Articles

Editorial

Research Ethics and Integrity Research is a process that involves numerous stages—including developing the idea, formulating the research title, partnering with other researchers and the research subjects, developing the research methods, collecting and analysing data, reporting findings, writing and publishing the research, among others. At every stage of the research process, researchers are required to adhere to ethical norms to meet the overall objectives of research, notably to advance the body of knowledge and promote scholarship. Upholding ethics in the conduct of research is important to ensure the promotion of truth and minimisation of error in research findings. Researchers should also be held accountable for responsible use of research grants and other matters such as compliance with regulations and policies related to research, or care for their subjects while collecting data. Above all, researchers should be held accountable for their research content and, as such, they should be concerned with the quality and integrity of their research so that their ideas can be further developed in future research. Given the importance of research ethics, several professional bodies, government agencies and universities have developed ethical codes of conduct to be adopted by researchers. At an international level, efforts have also been made to foster more unified policies, guidelines and codes of conduct on research integrity. The ‘Singapore Statement on Research Integrity’, released in 2010, is a notable example.

Review of Research on Predatory Scientific Publications from Scopus Database between 2012 and 2022

Since the emergence of the internet and open science in the 1990s, “predatory journals,” or “predatory publishing,” have attracted the increasing attention of scholars. Research on the topic has grown at a rapid rate, particularly in the last five years. This article serves as the first bibliometric review on the topic of “predators in the scientific publication” and draws on 869 published articles from the Scopus database between 2012 and 30 March 2022. These papers were produced by a total of 1586 authors, coming from 101 countries, representing 1538 organizations, and published in 501 journals. Research disciplines mostly covered the fields of medicine, social sciences, and nursing. This study also reveals the complexity of issues and research trends around the topic of predatory scientific publications, including the review process for scientific journals, publication fees and article processing charges, open science and open-access publications, and the like and related topics such as the impact on scholars in developing countries and academic ethics. Finally, this article provides several recommendations, namely, the need for more efficient criteria to evaluate the quality of scientific journals, more public communication on the importance of ethics in research and publication, and a greater awareness among scholars and organizations of the implications of the “predator” issue in scientific publishing.

Ethics is more than Matter of Research

There are various motivations behind why complying with ethical rules while doing research is pivotal. As a matter of some importance, research standards help to promote research objectives like information, truth, and mistake evasion. Laws forbidding the creation, control, or deception of research information, for instance, help to guarantee that the truth is introduced and that blunders are limited. The most over the top shocking illustration of how research unfortunate behaviour can imperil individuals' lives is the account of Paolo Macchiarini, a specialist who acquired well known for a revealed clinical advancement that vowed to reform organ transplantation yet rather wound up obliterating individuals' lives. Trachea transplants were created by the Italian expert using synthetic scaffolds that had been implanted with the patients' stem cells. However, it was later discovered that his tests on humans were not based on sound preclinical research principles. At least seven of the nine individuals who received the treatment died as a result of the treatment. The importance of ethics in research has been recognised by the University Grants Commission of India, which has made an ethics paper mandatory for researchers in their course work examination. The study's primary goal is to draw attention to the significance of ethics in research as well as the ethical standards that should guide researchers.

Ethics for Artificial Intelligence: Focus on the Use of Radiology Images

인공지능의 연구 개발 및 활용에서 윤리의 중요성이 의료분야뿐 아니라 전 사회적으로 점차 널리 인식되고 있다. 이 종설은 영상의학 영상데이터를 인공지능 연구에 활용할 때 개인정보의 보호 및 데이터에 대한 권리 측면에서 윤리적으로 고려할 사항들에 대해서 국내 독자들에게 실용적인 정보를 제공하고자 한다. 따라서 이 글에 담긴 내용은 많은 부분이 관련된 국내법과 정부 제도에 바탕을 두고 있다. 인공지능의 연구 개발 및 활용에서 개인정보 보호는 매우 중요한 윤리적 원칙이며 연구 데이터의 적절한 가명처리는 개인정보 보호를 위한 핵심 방법이다. 아울러 인공지능 연구 개발에 의료 데이터를 상업적 이해관계를 최소화하며 윤리적으로 공유할 필요성도 부각되고 있다. 연구 데이터 공유는 개인정보 유출의 위험을 증가시키므로 개인정보 보호에 더욱 주의가 필요하다.

Assessment of research ethics education offerings of pharmacy master programs in an Arab nation relative to top programs worldwide: A qualitative content analysis.

The importance of research ethics (RE) training has led academic and funding institutions to require that students, trainees, and faculty obtain such training at various stages of their careers. Despite the increasing awareness of the value RE education offers, this training requirement is absent in Jordan. We aimed to assess RE education offerings of pharmacy master programs in Jordan and compare with the top-ranked pharmacy graduate programs globally. Therefore, a list of universities that offer research-based pharmacy master programs was created. Each program was evaluated for the inclusion of RE education. A qualitative content analysis approach based on inductive reasoning and latent analysis was followed to analyze the data. Results of the study showed a lack of appropriate RE education for graduate-level pharmacy programs in Jordan with only 40% of the programs partially discuss selected topics related to RE. Regarding pharmacy graduate programs globally, 10% offer a standalone RE course, 40% offer some discussions related to RE, another 10% do not offer RE education in any form, and the remaining 40% of the programs were difficult to assess due to lack of sufficient information available online. Based on the findings of this study, training in RE is tends to be lacking in pharmacy graduate programs in Jordan and globally, with a greater lack in Jordan than globally. There is a need to incorporate formal RE education into programs that do not offer this type of instruction. Programs that formally touch on some aspects of RE need to expand the scope of topics to include more RE-related themes. Integrating a standalone RE course into pharmacy graduate programs is highly encouraged.

Importance of Ethics in Research

Importance of Ethics in Research

Assessing risk factors for tuberculosis treatment failure among pulmonary tuberculosis patients in four health regions of Burkina Faso, 2009.

Conducting research studies is one of the competencies that epidemiology students should have after two years training as a crucial component to identifying and resolving public health problems. This case study is developed from a research study on assessing risks factors on tuberculosis treatment failure in Burkina Faso in 2009 to help students to cover these competences. This case study is ideal for reinforcing principles of conducting case-control studies for risk-factor assessment. The case study will help epidemiology learners outline a study proposal, reinforce knowledge about research design, data collection and data analysis issues, recognize the importance of ethics in research, and interpret results and use them to make conclusions and recommendations.

Reactively, Proactively, Implicitly, Explicitly? Academics’ Pedagogical Conceptions of how to Promote Research Ethics and Integrity

This article focuses on academics’ conceptions of teaching research ethics and integrity. Seventeen academics from a Finnish research intensive university participated in this qualitative study. The data were collected using a qualitative multi-method approach, including think-aloud and interview data. The material was scrutinized using thematic analysis, with both deductive and inductive approaches. The results revealed variation in academics’ views on the responsibility for teaching research integrity, the methods employed to teach it and the necessity of intervening when misconduct occurs. The academics emphasized the responsibility of the individual teacher and the student to foster integrity as well as the shared responsibility of all members of the academic community. However, many academics felt that they themselves needed pedagogical training. Most shared the view that practices of responsible conduct in research can be explicitly and intentionally taught through demonstration, explanation, and practice. However, the academics also noted that learning research integrity and ethics takes place implicitly. A few questioned the need for and the utility of training in the form of courses or through an explicitly addressed topic included in, for instance, methods courses. Their views on the question of how to deal with alleged cases of misconduct varied. While many academics considered a proactive approach the best way to prevent misconduct, some trusted more in a reactive approach. The results show that, while in general academics agree on the importance of research ethics, their conceptions of teaching it vary. The teaching conception bears consequences for the teaching methods chosen, assignment of responsibility for both teaching and students learning, and for the way in which teachers believe that misconduct should be responded to.

Pedagogical Support for Responsible Conduct of Research Training

The number of training programs for the responsible conduct of research (RCR) has increased substantially over the past few decades as the importance of research ethics has received greater attention. It is unclear, however, whether the proliferation of RCR training programs has improved researcher integrity or the public's trust in science. Rather than training researchers simply to comply with regulations, we could use the opportunity to develop researchers' ability to understand and appreciate the ethical ideals that inform the regulations in order to help them integrate ethical decision-making into their work on a regular basis. Incorporating ethical principles into research training requires a new way of teaching RCR and the development of support materials to facilitate its adoption. The Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues, a panel established to advise the President on bioethical issues arising from advances in biomedicine and related areas of science and technology, developed and provides pedagogical materials based on its published reports to facilitate the integration of ethics education across the curriculum and in support of RCR and general bioethics education.

Failure to Apply for Ethical Approval for Health Studies in Low-Income Countries.

On too many occasions researchers conduct public health and/or epidemiological studies in low-income countries without the appropriate in-country ethical approval. This article reflects on some of the underlying reasons for not applying for ethical approval. The piece concludes that we need to start by educating our (junior) researchers and research students about the importance of research ethics. We conclude with a number of recommendations for researchers, scientific journal editors and reviewers and ethical committees in high-income countries to bring the message home to researchers that ethical approval should be sought in low-income countries if and when required!

Research Ethics in Sign Language Communities

Codes of ethics exist for most professional associations whose members do research on, for, or with sign language communities. However, these ethical codes are silent regarding the need to frame research ethics from a cultural standpoint, an issue of particular salience for sign language communities. Scholars who write from the perspective of feminists, indigenous peoples, and human rights advocates have commonly expressed dissatisfaction with their lack of representation in conversations about research ethics. Members of sign language communities and their advocates can learn from others who share in this struggle and contribute much to this topic. We propose the development of sign language communities' terms of reference (SLCTR) as a means to research by, for, and with sign language communities.

Responsabilidad social de la actividad científica.

The paper offers a reflection on the importance of Ethics in research and application of science. The appearance of new research fields: biotechnology, genetic, nanotechnology, etc., implies the emergency of new questions on the expectations and consequences of its application to Society. The former reflection involves the need to approach their responsibility on the scientific activity, but it cannot be accomplished under traditional parameters, but attending to new criteria. Taking this into account, it is necessary to formulate such as questions: What those limits should be? What are their limits? Whether is society trained to assume new challenges? etc. since Ethics should never restrain knowledge.

Making Ethics Work in Collaborative Projects

This article discusses problems a research team had managing their ethical obligations during a short project, and considers the implications of these problems for better understanding and carrying out ethical research in the future. Two key points will be proposed. Initially, it will be argued that the culture of ethical research as articulated within the research community may not be universally accepted within the primary health care sector. The nature of "ethical conduct" within clinical practice, service provision and research is not the same. Further, practical difficulties the researchers experienced while trying to gain approval from ethics committees and implement the proposed research plan highlight some ways in which institutional ethical review processes are structurally unsuited to the requirements of small collaborative projects. Understanding the different ways in which the term "ethics" is used will allow for a more expedient translation of concepts between different health professionals. Recognising the practical constraints ethical review places on the research process may help reduce some of the frustration primary health care professionals can experience when faced with the requirements of research ethics committees. Due to the history of, and cultural commitment to, ethical research within the university sector, those with formal academic training in research are well placed to assume responsibility for managing the ethics process when involved in cross-sectoral research. This responsibility may include the need to educate team members and study participants about the importance of research ethics.

Do the right thing

You don't need to be involved in a case of scientific fraud to appreciate the importance of ethics in research. Ethical behavior — such as publishing only what is true, giving credit where it's due, and sharing materials when needed to permit replication of one's observations — has always been critical to the scientific enterprise. For science to progress, scientists must be able to trust one another's work and to use that work as a foundation upon which to base future research.High-profile cases of fraudulent behavior often cause permanent harm not only to those caught up in the investigations; they are bad for the whole scientific community. Such scandals reduce the likelihood that our findings will be accepted by the public and that our research will continue to be supported through public funds.In the US, many governmental agencies, colleges, universities and scientific societies have awoken to the crucial importance of responsible conduct and now actively promote, if not require, the teaching of research ethics. Such courses often follow a standard format. Students are asked to attend six or eight sessions held over as many weeks. At each session an introductory lecture is provided, often by a member of the philosophy department or the biomedical ethics program, then a case involving an ethical issue is discussed among the students. Obtaining credit for such programs usually depends on attendance or, occasionally, on the preparation of a brief report.What's wrong with this picture? Well, compare such an educational approach with the manner in which we teach students an important skill, such as critical analysis of the literature. When does such training begin, how long does it last, who provides it, and how is competency assessed? The contrast is obvious. Yet, is responsible conduct in science actually less important than critical reading? The answer can only be, no.It was just this line of thinking that brought the two of us to the realization that a serious and effective program in ethics for researchers must follow the same general approach we use to provide instruction in any of the other skills critical to doing research (see http://www.pitt.edu/∼survival/ and [1xTeaching ethics: Resources for researchers. Fischer, BA and Zigmond, MJ. Trends Neurosci. 1996; 19: 523–524Abstract | Full Text | Full Text PDFSee all References][1]). This means beginning the instruction in ethics as soon as students arrive and continuing it for as long as they remain, having the great bulk of the instruction done by faculty who are active researchers in the trainees' disciplines, infusing the training throughout the curriculum, making it clear that good science must of necessity be ethical science.These discussions on ethics should cover a wide range of topics, from high crimes (fabrication, falsification, and plagiarism) to misdemeanors (for example, honorary authorship, misleading graphs, mis-mentoring). But the discussions must go further. The difficult issues are those in which two or more values or obligations conflict. Do I take the data set with me to my next position so that the work (and my career) can continue, or do I leave it behind with my advisor who requested it but did not create it? Do I show my colleague a paper I have been asked to review because it will keep her from wasting time with a study that has now been done, or do I respect the author's confidentiality?And the discussions must go further still, because we cannot anticipate all of the ethical issues of the future. Who would have predicted 20 years ago that researchers today would have to deal with whether it is appropriate to submit to a journal data that they have already placed on their web site, or with the philosophical issues raised by our ability to clone higher organisms?How do we prepare students for what we cannot anticipate? Again, the analogy with how we deal with other aspects of the curriculum is instructive. We focus not on the details but on the process, on analysis and reasoning, in this case, reasoning about ethical issues [2xBebeau, MJ, Pimple, KD, Muskavitch, KMT, Borden, SL, and Smith, DH. See all References][2]. We offer a dilemma and then work with the students to identify the conflicting needs or obligations that form the basis for that dilemma. We ask them to determine who could be affected by the actions of the main characters and how. Then we ask the students to decide what actions should be taken and why.Of course, designing and implementing such a comprehensive training program requires time and effort — a brief series of discussions is much easier and might even allow us to ‘get by’. But the cost of success must be evaluated by comparison with the risk of failure. In this case, some extra effort seems justified; the continued health of science and our society may depend on it.