Integridade na pesquisa: ética profissional dos cientistas - O papel do Comitê de Integridade na Pesquisa do Instituto Adolfo Lutz / Research integrity: professional ethics of scientists - The role of the Research Integrity Committee at the Adolfo Lutz Institute

O Comitê de Integridade na Pesquisa do Instituto Adolfo Lutz (CIPIAL), com o objetivo de promover a cultura da integridade científica como um dos valores fundamentais defendidos pela instituição nas suas atividades de pesquisa, considera relevante compartilhar com a comunidade científica a sua implantação, destacando o seu papel no gerenciamento deste tema na instituição. Após a publicação de seu regimento, de acordo com as suas competências primordiais, o CIPIAL elaborou e publicou o Código de Boas Práticas Científicas do IAL com o objetivo de definir as políticas de integridade para orientar os profissionais envolvidos com a pesquisa. (AU)

The Research Integrity Committee of the Adolfo Lutz Institute (CIPIAL), with the aim of promoting the culture of scientific integrity as one of the fundamental values defended by the institution in its research activities, considers it relevant to share its implementation with the scientific community, highlighting its role in managing this issue at the institution. Following the publication of its rules and regulations, in accordance with its core competencies, CIPIAL drew up and published the IAL Code of Good Scientific Practice with the aim of defining integrity policies to guide professionals involved in research. (AU)

Una Revisión de los tipos de Fraude Científico más Frecuentes / A Review of the most frequent types of Scientific Fraud

La presión que existe hoy por publicar ha llevado a que muchos investigadores cometan malas conductas científicas, siendo el fraude la más grave de todas. Este ocurre en forma de fabricación, falsificación, plagio, problemas de autoría, manipulación de imágenes y publicaciones redundantes. El fraude científico se define como una tergiversación deliberada por parte de alguien que conoce la verdad. En la historia de la humanidad se han conocido importantes casos de fraude científico, dentro de ellos se pueden destacar: el hombre de Piltdown, caso Shinichi Fujimura, el escándalo de las vacunas, caso Pearce, el caso Yoshitaka Fujii, entre otros. Con el objetivo de neutralizar el fraude, se han desarrollado diferentes estrategias dirigidas a detectarlo, dentro de ellas encontramos: evaluación mediante pares evaluadores, programas de Conducta de Investigación Responsable (RCR), regulaciones que la misma comunidad científica realiza, donde encontramos la fundación PubPeer y el blog For Better Science. Del mismo modo, se han impuesto diferentes medidas para contrarrestar el fraude, tales como: transparencia de las presiones y oportunidades, disponibilidad pública de los datos que sustentan la hipótesis y denuncia pública de los fraudes científicos. El impacto de un fraude trae consecuencias importantes para la ciencia, estudiar a partir de información falsa o errónea conlleva a un gran retroceso en los avances científicos del mundo actual. Es responsabilidad de cada uno ser consciente de lo que se escribe y lo que se lee, ya que como se sabe, esa es la única manera de combatirlo. Como investigadores somos responsables de actuar éticamente en nuestras investigaciones y tener conocimiento de las medidas que existen hoy para detectar y combatir el fraude científico.

The pressure to publish today has led many researchers to commit scientific misconduct, fraud being the most serious of all. This occurs in the form of fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, authorship problems, image manipulation, and redundant posting. Scientific fraud is defined as deliberate misrepresentation by someone who knows the truth. In the history of humanity, important cases of scientific fraud have been known, among them the following can be highlighted: the Piltdown man, the Shinichi Fujimura case, the vaccine scandal, the Pearce case, the Yoshitaka Fujii case, among others. In order to neutralize fraud, different strategies have been developed to detect it, among them we find: evaluation by peer reviewers, Responsible Research Conduct (RCR) programs, regulations that the scientific community itself carries out, where we find the PubPeer Foundation and the For Better Science blog. Similarly, different measures have been imposed to counteract fraud, such as: transparency of pressures and opportunities, public availability of the data that support the hypothesis, and public denunciation of scientific fraud. The impact of a fraud has important consequences for science, studying from false or wrong information leads to a great setback in scientific advances in the world today. It is the responsibility of each one to be aware of what is written and what is read, since as is known, that is the only way to combat it. As researchers we are responsible for acting ethically in our research and being aware of the measures that exist today to detect and combat scientific fraud.

Manipulação e fabricação de dados em pesquisa científica: as consequências são tão simples como pensamos? / Data manipulation and fabrication in scientific research: are the consequences as simple as we think?

A má conduta científica vem sendo observada ao longo da história da ciência, entretanto, nas últimas décadas teve um crescimento exponencial, e um exemplo disso foi a época da pandemia da COVID-19. Ficamos a refletir sobre o potencial impacto que uma evidência frágil pode gerar a partir de um convencimento de uma prática ou tomada de decisão profissional. Isso pode ocorrer devido a falhas no sistema educacional, na formação de pesquisadores e até mesmo a desvios morais e éticos.

Scientific misconduct has been observed throughout the history of science. However, it has grown exponentially in recent decades, an example of which was the time of the COVID-19 pandemic. We reflect on the potential impact of weak evidence from a convincing practice or professional decision-making. This situation can occur due to educational system failures, training of researchers, and even moral and ethical deviations.

Analysis of the characteristics of retracted scientific papers in the field of global liver diseases published by Chinese scholars / 中华肝脏病杂志

Objective: To analyze the characteristics of scientific papers in the field of global liver diseases published by Chinese scholars that were retracted for diverse reasons from the Retraction Watch database, so as to provide a reference to publishing-related papers. Methods: The Retraction Watch database was retrieved for retracted papers in the field of global liver disease published by Chinese scholars from March 1, 2008 to January 28, 2021. The regional distribution, source journals, reasons for retraction, publication and retraction times, and others were analyzed. Results: A total of 101 retracted papers that were distributed across 21 provinces/cities were retrieved. Zhejiang area (n = 17) had the most retracted papers, followed by Shanghai (n = 14), and Beijing (n = 11). The vast majority were research papers (n = 95). The journal PLoS One had the highest number of retracted papers. In terms of time distribution, 2019 (n = 36) had the most retracted papers. 23 papers, accounting for 8.3% of all retractions, were retracted owing to journal or publisher concerns. Liver cancer (34%), liver transplantation (16%), hepatitis (14%), and others were the main areas of retracted papers. Conclusion: Chinese scholars have a large number of retracted articles in the field of global liver diseases. A journal or publisher chooses to retract a manuscript after investigating and discovering more flawed problems, which, however, require further support, revision, and supervision from the editorial and academic circles.

Responsabilização em más condutas científicas: opinião de editores do SciELO / Accountability to scientific misconduct: the SciELO editors' view / Responsabilidad por malas conductas científicas: opinión de los editores de SciELO

Responsabilização (accountability) em comunicação e editoração científica é um importante tema em ética e integridade em pesquisa, e um dos grandes desafios atuais da ciência. Este artigo apresenta um estudo descritivo sobre a responsabilização e os seus atores na comunicação científica (autores, revisores, editores), partindo da questão da responsabilização desses atores e das más condutas científicas vista por editores de revista SciELO do Brasil e de países da América Latina. Apresenta resultados a partir da visão dos editores em que os autores são responsáveis, e, parcialmente, os revisores e os próprios editores

Accountability in scientific communication and publishing is an important topic in ethics and research integrity, and one of the great challenges of science today. This article presents a descriptive study on accountability and its actors in scientific communication (authors, reviewers, editors), starting from the issue of accountability of these actors and from the scientific misconducts viewed by SciELO journals editors in Brazil and Latin America. Based on the editors' view, it stands that the authors are responsible, and the reviewers and the editors are partially responsible

La responsabilidad (accountability) en la comunicación y publicación científica es un tema importante en la ética y la integridad en la investigación, y uno de los grandes desafíos de la ciencia actual. Este artículo presenta un estudio descriptivo sobre la responsabilidad y sus actores en la comunicación científica (autores, revisores, editores), a partir de la cuestión de responsabilidad de estos actores y de las malas conductas científicas vista por los editores de revista SciELO en Brasil y en países de América Latina. Presenta resultados en la visión de los editores de que los autores son responsables, y los revisores y los propios editores son parcialmente responsables.

Improving systems to promote research integrity

@#Research integrity is manifested thru the use of honest and verifiable research methods with adherence to accepted professional codes. Recently, trustworthiness in research has been challenged by various forms of research misconduct, such as analytical flexibility, data dredging, HARKing (hypothesis after research knowledge), plagiarism, and selective and distorted reporting. Drivers of research misconduct have been identified as institutional--publication incentives to pursue a career, researcher--metric of success is publication volume, and the journal-- more likely to accept papers with positive. The open-access mode propelling the proliferation of predatory journals is causing a dilemma to sound research reporting. Measures were established to curtail research integrity challenges, such as study registration, open data, common reporting standards, a team of rivals, and blind analysis. This report will elaborate and provide insight into what influenced research misconduct, how it can be mitigated, and how to maintain a credible research environment.

Reflexões sobre o plágio e a fraude em estudos brasileiros / Reflections on plagiarism and fraud in Brazilian studies / Reflexiones sobre plagio y fraude en estudios brasileños

Resumo Este estudo reflete sobre o plágio e a fraude na produção científica brasileira por meio de revisão integrativa de artigos publicados entre janeiro de 2009 e junho de 2019. As publicações foram buscadas nas bases DOAJ, Lilacs, PubMed, SciELO e Web of Science, com os descritores exatos "plagiarism", "scientific misconduct", "fraud" e "Brazil". Com a rápida expansão da internet e o desenvolvimento tecnológico, os casos de má conduta na produção científica aumentaram, ocorrendo, por exemplo, adulteração, invenção ou reutilização de dados, múltiplas submissões, conflitos de autoria e de interesses, publicação "salame" (fracionada) e plágio. Entre as más condutas acadêmicas mais comuns estão a "cola" e o plágio, presentes nos mais diversos níveis de ensino, da educação básica à educação superior.

Abstract This integrative review reflects on plagiarism and fraud in Brazilian studies based on scientific production and academic attitude. Literature search of articles published between January 2009 and June 2019 was conducted in the DOAJ, LILACS, PubMed, SciELO and Web of Science databases, using the exact descriptors "Plagiarism," "Scientific Misconduct," "Fraud" and "Brazil." The rapid expansion of the internet and technological development lead to increased cases of misconduct in scientific production, occurring, for example, tampering, fabrication or reuse of data, multiple submissions, conflicts of authorship and interests, salami publication (salami slicing) and plagiarism. Among the most common academic misconducts are the copying and plagiarism, present at all education levels, whether in primary or tertiary education.

Resumen Este estudio promueve una reflexión sobre el plagio y el fraude en estudios brasileños basados en la producción científica y la postura académica a través de una revisión integradora de artículos publicados entre enero de 2009 y junio de 2019. Se realizó una búsqueda en las bases de datos DOAJ, LILACS, PubMed, SciELO y Web. of Science, utilizando los descriptores exactos "Plagio", "Mala conducta científica", "Fraude" y "Brasil". Con la rápida expansión de Internet y el desarrollo tecnológico, han aumentado los casos de mala conducta en la producción científica, ocurriendo, por ejemplo, adulteración, invención o reutilización de datos, múltiples presentaciones, conflictos de autoría e intereses, publicación "salami" (fraccional) y plagio. Entre las faltas académicas más comunes se encuentran el "pegamento" y el plagio, presentes en los más diversos estratos, ya sea en la Educación Básica o en la Educación Superior.

Comportamientos deshonestos y plagio en la publicación científica / Dishonest behavior and plagiarism in scientific publication

La publicación científica en ciencias de la salud constituye una necesidad, pues pone a disposición de la comunidad académica nuevos conocimientos generados a partir de la investigación. Mostrar estos resultados es beneficioso para los sistemas de salud, ya que evita realizar investigaciones duplicadas, ahorra presupuesto a los organismos y favorece el desarrollo de la ciencia, sustentado en nuevos resultados. El proceso de publicación científica constituye un acuerdo bilateral entre el investigador y la revista, donde el autor confía sus resultados a esta, y la revista, a la vez, confía en la veracidad de los resultados y la moralidad del investigador(AU)

Bioethics in medical care rationing during the coronavirus disease-19 pandemic

ABSTRACT Background: Coronavirus (CoV) disease (COVID)-19 poses difficult situations in which the ethical course of action is not clear, or choices are made between equally unacceptable responses. Methods: A web search was performed using the terms “bioethics; COVID-19; ethics; severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV-2; emergent care; pandemic; and public health emergencies.” Results: Protection from COVID-19 has resulted in the cancellation of necessary medical interventions, lengthened suffering, and potential non-COVID-19 deaths. Prolonged lockdown reduced well-being, triggering or aggravating mental illnesses and violence, and escalated medical risks. Collateral damage includes restrictions on visitations to hospitals, alienation from the deceased relative, or lack of warm caring of patients. Finally, in a public health crisis, public health interest overrides individual rights if it results in severe harm to the community. Conclusion: Balancing ethical dilemmas are one more challenge in the COVID-19 pandemic. (REV INVEST CLIN. 2021;73(1):1-5)

La revisión por pares pospublicación: otro control de calidad del registro científico en biomedicina / Post-publication peer review: another sort of quality control of the scientific record in biomedicine

Resumen La revisión por pares tradicional atraviesa por crecientes cuestionamientos, dado el aumento en el fraude científico detectado y la crisis de replicación que recientemente se ha presentado en la investigación biomédica. Investigadores, instituciones académicas y agencias de financiamiento activamente promueven el análisis del registro científico y se han desarrollado múltiples herramientas para lograrlo. Diferentes revistas biomédicas se fundaron con la revisión por pares pospublicación como característica; existen varias plataformas digitales que hacen posible este proceso. Asimismo, cada vez hay más revistas biomédicas que permiten comentar artículos publicados en sus sitios web, lo cual también es posible en repositorios de preimpresiones. Sumado a esto, las casas editoriales y los investigadores están usando ampliamente las redes sociales para la difusión y discusión de artículos, lo cual a veces culmina en refutaciones y retracciones.

Abstract Traditional peer review is undergoing increasing questioning, given the increase in scientific fraud detected and the replication crisis biomedical research is currently going through. Researchers, academic institutions, and research funding agencies actively promote scientific record analysis, and multiple tools have been developed to achieve this. Different biomedical journals were founded with post-publication peer review as a feature, and there are several digital platforms that make this process possible. In addition, an increasing number biomedical journals allow commenting on articles published on their websites, which is also possible in preprint repositories. Moreover, publishing houses and researchers are largely using social networks for the dissemination and discussion of articles, which sometimes culminates in refutations and retractions.

El plagio académico desde la perspectiva de la ética de la publicación científica / Academic plagiarism as misconduct in scientific publication

Las malas conductas científicas que puedan cometer los autores al momento de planificar, ejecutar o informar los resultados de sus estudios pueden conducir al rechazo del futuro artículo e incluso a la veda del autor con las consiguientes sanciones administrativas, legales y/o jurídicas. El plagio es un acto de apropiación indebida de propiedades intelectuales, textos académicos, métodos investigativos, gráficos e ideas, así como la fabricación y falsificación de información, que en la ética de las publicaciones científicas se clasifican como un tipo de mala conducta científica. En el ambiente universitario se evidencia un aumento de casos de plagio al momento de analizar los trabajos académicos, tesis, trabajos de fin de grado, tesis y disertaciones cuando se utilizan software antiplagio; sin embargo, se resalta que el desconocimiento de las estrategias para evitar el plagio es frecuente entre estudiantes de pregrado y de posgrado. Con la finalidad de exponer información sobre el plagio académico, el presente artículo tuvo como objetivo describir los principales conceptos, causas, factores asociados e impacto que posee el plagio desde la perspectiva de la ética de la publicación científica(AU)

The acts of scientific misconduct potentially performed by authors when planning, conducting or reporting the results of their studies may lead to rejection of the future paper and even the banning of the author alongside the corresponding administrative and/or legal sanctions. Plagiarism is the wrongful appropriation of copyrights, academic texts, research methods, charts and ideas, as well as the fabrication and falsification of information, all of which classifies as instances of scientific misconduct in the ethics of scientific publication. An increase in the number of instances of plagiarism is observed in the university environment when analyzing academic studies, theses, diploma papers and dissertations using anti-plagiarism software. However, unawareness of the strategies to prevent plagiarism is common among undergraduate and graduate students. The purpose of the present study was to present information about academic plagiarism, discussing the main concepts, causes, associated factors and impact of plagiarism from the perspective of scientific publication ethics(AU)

Ética e bioética no mundo científico: uma revisão integrativa / Ética y bioética en el mundo científico: una revisión integradora de la literatura / Ethics and Bioethics in the Scientific World: An Integrative Review

Resumo Objetivou-se analisar, por meio da literatura, a realidade das questões éticas e bioéticas no mundo científico. Trata-se de uma revisão integrativa, realizada com artigos contidos em três bases de dados. Foram utilizados sete Descritores em Ciências da Saúde, a partir dos quais foram elaboradas três combinações utilizadas em todas as bases. Após aplicar os critérios de inclusão, foram selecionados 18 artigos. As más condutas, especialmente o plágio, a falsificação e fabricação de dados vêm apresentando comportamento crescente e requerem medidas mais severas para seu controle, a fim de manter a credibilidade científica perante a sociedade e os órgãos superiores.

Resumen El objetivo fue analizar, por medio de la literatura, la realidad de las cuestiones éticas y bioéticas en el mundo científico. Esta es una revisión integradora, realizada con artículos de tres bases. Se utilizaron siete Descriptores de Ciencias de la Salud, desde los cuales se elaboraron tres combinaciones que se utilizaron en todas las bases. Después de aplicar los criterios de inclusión, se seleccionaron 18 artículos. La mala conducta, especialmente el plagio, falsificación y fabricación de datos, ha mostrado un comportamiento creciente y requiere medidas más estrictas para controlarlo a fin de mantener la credibilidad científica con la sociedad y las instituciones superiores.

Abstract This paper studies the reality of ethical and bioethical issues in the scientific world through an integrative literature review of articles included in three databases. Seven terms from the thesaurus Health Sciences Descriptors were used, from which three combinations were elaborated and used in the three databases. After applying inclusion requirements, a total of 18 articles were selected. Certain misconducts, particularly plagiarism, falsification and data fabrication, have been showing an increasing behavior, which requires more stringent measures in order to control such phenomenon and maintain scientific credibility before society and authorities.