Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 29
Filter
1.
Gac. méd. Méx ; 156(1): 53-59, ene.-feb. 2020.
Article in Spanish | LILACS | ID: biblio-1249870

ABSTRACT

Resumen En este ensayo se analizan las implicaciones bioéticas de la reciente manipulación genética en embriones humanos con CRISPR-Cas9 para eliminar el gen CCR5 y el nacimiento de dos gemelas discordantes. El experimento se divulgó en medios sociales. Los principales problemas bioéticos identificados son la justificación del modelo, el proceso de consentimiento informado y la falta de declaración de evidentes conflictos de interés. No se evaluaron apropiadamente las consecuencias del experimento sobre la vida de las gemelas nacidas como la afectación a su autonomía, los supuestos beneficios por recibir y los riesgos futuros de daño durante su vida. Habiendo manipulado la línea celular germinal, no se consideraron los efectos sobre su descendencia futura. Este tipo de acciones tiene un impacto negativo en la forma como la sociedad concibe la ciencia. La ingeniería genética debe reservarse al contexto experimental básico o bien como investigación cínica para la corrección de enfermedades conocidas graves de origen genético, bajo estricta supervisión regulatoria y bioética y de manera gradualista de acuerdo con el progreso de las técnicas de edición genética.


Abstract In this essay, the bioethical implications of the recent genetic manipulation in human embryos with CRISPR-Cas9 to eliminate the CCR5 gene and the birth of a pair of discordant twin girls are analyzed. The experiment was disseminated via social media. The main bioethical flaws identified include the justification of the model, the informed consent process and the lack of disclosure of evident conflicts of interest. The consequences of the experiment on the life of the twins that were born were not properly evaluated, such as the impact on their autonomy, the alleged benefits to be received and the future risks of harm during their lifetime. Having manipulated the germ cell line, the effects on their future offspring were not considered. This type of actions negatively affects the way society conceives science. Genetic engineering should be reserved to the basic experimental context or as clinical research for the correction of known serious diseases of genetic origin under strict regulatory and bioethical supervision and using a gradualist approach in accordance with the advances of gene editing techniques.


Subject(s)
Humans , Female , Receptors, CCR5/genetics , CRISPR-Cas Systems , Gene Editing/ethics , Publishing/ethics , Research Design , Twins, Dizygotic , Genetic Engineering/classification , Genetic Engineering/ethics , Genome, Human , HIV Infections/prevention & control , China , Conflict of Interest , Sperm Injections, Intracytoplasmic , Bioethical Issues , Therapeutic Human Experimentation/ethics , Informed Consent/ethics
3.
Arch. cardiol. Méx ; 89(2): 105-111, Apr.-Jun. 2019.
Article in Spanish | LILACS | ID: biblio-1149066

ABSTRACT

Abstract The Editors’ Network of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) provides a dynamic forum for editorial discussions and endorses the recommendations of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) to improve the scientific quality of biomedical journals. Authorship confers credit and important academic rewards. Recently, however, the ICMJE emphasized that authorship also requires responsibility and accountability. These issues are now covered by the new (fourth) criterion for authorship. Authors should agree to be accountable and ensure that questions regarding the accuracy and integrity of the entire work will be appropriately addressed. This review discusses the implications of this paradigm shift on authorship requirements with the aim of increasing awareness on good scientific and editorial practices.


Subject(s)
Publishing/ethics , Authorship , Social Responsibility , Editorial Policies
4.
Rev. méd. Chile ; 147(2): 238-242, Feb. 2019.
Article in Spanish | LILACS | ID: biblio-1004337

ABSTRACT

Young authors may benefit by some advices on how to proceed when they decide to write a manuscript and submit it to a medical journal. They should start by selecting the journal considering the topic and nature of their study, how relevant the results seem and the interest it may have in editors and readers. A reasonable choice should consider new journals that publish good papers selected after external peer review. Then they should study and follow the Instructions to Authors of the chosen journal. A strong call is given to recognize and avoid "predatory journals". Specific statements refer to Instructions to Authors and language requirements by the journal, the need to follow "ICMJE Recommendations", the correct assignment of authorship, and a strict observance of ethical regulations in biomedical and clinical research. Special mention is given to provide a good abstract, in English, either descriptive or structured depending on the nature of their study. These advices may be useful as well as a reminder to older authors on how to improve their manuscripts before submitting them to a mainstream medical journal.


Subject(s)
Publishing/standards , Authorship/standards , Journalism, Medical/standards , Publishing/ethics , Writing/standards , Manuscripts, Medical as Topic
7.
Rev. gastroenterol. Perú ; 38(3): 306-309, jul.-set. 2018. tab
Article in Spanish | LILACS | ID: biblio-1014101

ABSTRACT

Nos encontramos atravesando un momento en el cual se están dando a conocer faltas a la ética en la función pública que habían venido ocurriendo a todo nivel. Es importante conocer los códigos de ética y buenas prácticas de cada una de las funciones que se desempeñan. En el ámbito de las publicaciones científicas, es muy recomendable que todos los investigadores que deseen realizar publicaciones conozcan las buenas prácticas científicas y los principios éticos básicos de las publicaciones en ciencias. La gran mayoría de revistas médicas se guían por las recomendaciones del Comité Internacional de Editores de Revistas Médicas (ICMJE) y en lo referente a las faltas éticas, por los lineamientos del Comité deÉtica en Publicaciones (COPE). Faltas frecuentes que se pueden encontrar en las revistas locales son problemas de autoría, publicación redundante y plagio y falta de declaración de conflicto de interés. En el presente artículo brindamos enlaces a recursos de autoaprendizaje en estos temas y enfatizamos la importancia de su amplia diseminación.


We are going through a moment in which acts of disregard to the ethics in the public function are being disclosed at all levels. It is important to know the codes of ethics and good practices of each of the functions performed. In the field of scientific publications, it is highly recommended that all researchers who wish to publish their studies get to know the good scientific practices and the basic ethical principles of publications in science. The vast majority of medical journals are guided by the recommendations of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) and with respect to ethical shortcomings, by the guidelines of the COPE (Committee on Ethics in Publications). Frequent examples of scientific misconduct that can be found in local magazines are problems of authorship, redundant publication and plagiarism and lack of declaration of conflict of interest. In the present article we provide links to self-learning resources on these topics and we emphasize the importance of their wide dissemination.


Subject(s)
Humans , Publishing/standards , Scientific Misconduct , Publishing/ethics , Research Design/standards , Authorship , Duplicate Publications as Topic , Plagiarism , Scientific Misconduct/ethics , Conflict of Interest , Editorial Policies
8.
Rev. méd. Chile ; 146(3): 373-378, mar. 2018.
Article in Spanish | LILACS | ID: biblio-961402

ABSTRACT

Ethical problems have always been present in scientific publications. Since the founding of medical journals, in the XIX Century, until today they are a source of concern because one main purpose of medical scientific publications is to add new, reliable information that could guide or modify medical decisions and public health policies. Since 1997, Revista Médica de Chile has published several articles clarifying this situation and emphasizing the need to avoid ethical misbehavior. The present review reminds that the main sources of information dealing with publication ethics appear in the web sites of ICMJE, COPE and WAME. Misconduct have been detected in Revista Médica de Chile in a few cases of redundant publications, plagiarism, lack of recognition of conflicts of interest mainly with pharmaceutical companies, and one attempt of forging the publication of an article that had been previously rejected. In handling situations identified as ethical misbehavior, the editors of this journal have successfully followed rules established by COPE. This article reviews and reinforces recommendations to avoid ethical misbehavior in biomedical research and in manuscripts submitted for publication.


Subject(s)
Humans , Periodicals as Topic/ethics , Publishing/ethics , Biomedical Research/ethics , Plagiarism , Scientific Misconduct , Chile , Conflict of Interest , Editorial Policies
9.
Acta bioeth ; 23(1): 63-70, jun. 2017. tab
Article in Portuguese | LILACS | ID: biblio-886005

ABSTRACT

O objetivo do estudo consistiu em analisar a literatura existente sobre a fraude científica e seus aspectos bioéticos. Revisão de literatura do tipo integrativa, sendo os dados coletados nas bases de dados Lilacs e SciELO, por meio dos descritores, fraude científica e plágio. Foram encontrados 7 artigos que atenderam aos critérios de inclusão. Os resultados foram categorizados em três eixos temáticos, Histórico da fraude científica; Fraude científica e implicações bioéticas; e Medidas adotadas. Concluiu-se que os pesquisadores e acadêmicos devem estar sempre revendo suas posturas éticas diante das publicações científicas. Ainda há lacunas sobre as fraudes científicas, especialmente relacionando-as aos aspectos bioéticos. Assim, esse estudo poderá contribuir para as reflexões sobre a temática.


The scope of this study was to analyze the existing literature on scientific fraud and their bioethical issues. Type of integrative literature review and the data collected in the Lilacs and SciELO databases, using descriptors, scientific fraud and plagiarism. Found 7 articles that met the inclusion criteria. The results were categorized into three themes, History of scientific fraud; Scientific fraud and bioethical implications; and adopted measures. It was concluded that researchers and academics should always be reviewing their ethical stances in the face of scientific publications. There are still gaps about scientific fraud, particularly relating them to bioethical issues. Thus, this study may contribute to the reflections on the theme.


El objetivo de este estudio fue analizar la literatura existente sobre fraude científico y sus problemas bioéticos. Es un tipo de revisión bibliográfica integrativa y de datos recogidos en las bases Lilacs y SciELO, utilizando como descriptores "fraude científico" y "plagio". Se encontraron 7 artículos que cumplieron con los criterios de inclusión. Los resultados se clasificaron en tres temas: historia del fraude científico; fraude científico e implicaciones bioéticas, y medidas adoptadas. Se llegó a la conclusión de que los investigadores y académicos debían estar siempre revisando sus posturas éticas ante las publicaciones científicas. Todavía hay lagunas sobre el fraude científico, particularmente las relacionadas con cuestiones bioéticas. Este estudio puede contribuir a mayores reflexiones sobre el tema.


Subject(s)
Publishing/ethics , Plagiarism , Scientific Misconduct/ethics , Biomedical Research/ethics , Scientific Publication Ethics
12.
Journal of Korean Medical Science ; : 1908-1909, 2017.
Article in English | WPRIM | ID: wpr-159422
13.
Rev. méd. Chile ; 144(11): 1473-1478, nov. 2016. tab
Article in Spanish | LILACS | ID: biblio-845470

ABSTRACT

The frequency of conflicts about authorship of publications has increased along with the increase in the number of people involved in scientific work. Some of the factors that strongly influence the generation of conflicts and malpractices in authorship definition of scientific publications are the pressure of academia, economic incentives from the pharmaceutical industry in the field of biomedicine and authors’ wishes and expectations of recognition, among other factors. The article analyzes this problem, increasingly common in the field of medicine and related areas. Special attention is devoted to the prevailing laws in our country and international guidelines related to intellectual property and authorship of scientific publications, respectively. However, the ethical commitment, intellectual honesty and truthfulness of each of the authors about what is reported seems to be the decisive factor for the solution to these authorship conflicts.


Subject(s)
Humans , Periodicals as Topic/ethics , Publishing/ethics , Authorship , Ethics, Research , Scientific Misconduct , Conflict of Interest
18.
Journal of Korean Medical Science ; : 673-675, 2015.
Article in English | WPRIM | ID: wpr-99235

ABSTRACT

Researchers have an ethical responsibility to report the results of research involving human subjects. Dissemination of results ensures that patient care is based on good science and that the field of medicine advances based on complete and accurate knowledge. However, current evidence suggests that publication is often neglected or substantially delayed, especially in the case of negative and inconclusive results. Researchers, editors and reviewers should value all high-quality research regardless of the conclusiveness of the results and ensure that all research involving human subjects is registered in a publicly accessible database.


Subject(s)
Clinical Trials as Topic/ethics , Ethics, Research , Human Experimentation/ethics , Publishing/ethics , Republic of Korea , Research Report , Research Subjects
19.
Journal of Korean Medical Science ; : 1545-1552, 2015.
Article in English | WPRIM | ID: wpr-66183

ABSTRACT

Citations to scholarly items are building bricks for multidisciplinary science communication. Citation analyses are currently influencing individual career advancement and ranking of academic and research institutions worldwide. This article overviews the involvement of scientific authors, reviewers, editors, publishers, indexers, and learned associations in the citing and referencing to preserve the integrity of science communication. Authors are responsible for thorough bibliographic searches to select relevant references for their articles, comprehend main points, and cite them in an ethical way. Reviewers and editors may perform additional searches and recommend missing essential references. Publishers, in turn, are in a position to instruct their authors over the citations and references, provide tools for validation of references, and open access to bibliographies. Publicly available reference lists bear important information about the novelty and relatedness of the scholarly items with the published literature. Few editorial associations have dealt with the issue of citations and properly managed references. As a prime example, the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) issued in December 2014 an updated set of recommendations on the need for citing primary literature and avoiding unethical references, which are applicable to the global scientific community. With the exponential growth of literature and related references, it is critically important to define functions of all stakeholders of science communication in curbing the issue of irrational and unethical citations and thereby improve the quality and indexability of scholarly journals.


Subject(s)
Authorship/standards , Bibliographies as Topic , Editorial Policies , Information Dissemination/ethics , Peer Review, Research/ethics , Periodicals as Topic/ethics , Publishing/ethics , Quality Control , Science/ethics , Writing/standards
20.
Journal of Korean Medical Science ; : 1010-1016, 2015.
Article in English | WPRIM | ID: wpr-23740

ABSTRACT

Publishing scholarly articles in traditional and newly-launched journals is a responsible task, requiring diligence from authors, reviewers, editors, and publishers. The current generation of scientific authors has ample opportunities for publicizing their research. However, they have to selectively target journals and publish in compliance with the established norms of publishing ethics. Over the past few years, numerous illegitimate or predatory journals have emerged in most fields of science. By exploiting gold Open Access publishing, these journals paved the way for low-quality articles that threatened to change the landscape of evidence-based science. Authors, reviewers, editors, established publishers, and learned associations should be informed about predatory publishing practices and contribute to the trustworthiness of scholarly publications. In line with this, there have been several attempts to distinguish legitimate and illegitimate journals by blacklisting unethical journals (the Jeffrey Beall's list), issuing a statement on transparency and best publishing practices (the Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association's and other global organizations' draft document), and tightening the indexing criteria by the Directory of Open Access Journals. None of these measures alone turned to be sufficient. All stakeholders of science communication should be aware of multiple facets of unethical practices and publish well-checked and evidence-based articles.


Subject(s)
Communication , Disclosure/ethics , Ethics, Research , Fraud/ethics , Information Dissemination/ethics , Medical Writing , Periodicals as Topic/ethics , Publishing/ethics , Science/ethics
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL