Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
A Lancet review on Handling of Scientific Misconduct in Scandinavian countries provides the following sample definitions, [1] reproduced in The COPE report 1999: [2] Danish definition: "Intention or gross negligence leading to fabrication of the scientific message or a false credit or emphasis given to a scientist"
False evidence, fabricated evidence, forged evidence, fake evidence or tainted evidence is information created or obtained illegally in order to sway the verdict in a court case. Falsified evidence could be created by either side in a case (including the police/ prosecution in a criminal case ), or by someone sympathetic to either side.
In Denmark, scientific misconduct is defined as "intention[al] negligence leading to fabrication of the scientific message or a false credit or emphasis given to a scientist", and in Sweden as "intention[al] distortion of the research process by fabrication of data, text, hypothesis, or methods from another researcher's manuscript form or ...
Once the method and analysis plan is vetted through peer-review, publication of the findings is provisionally guaranteed, based on whether the authors follow the proposed protocol. One goal of registered reports is to circumvent the publication bias toward significant findings that can lead to implementation of questionable research practices.
The PRISMA flow diagram, depicting the flow of information through the different phases of a systematic review. PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) is an evidence-based minimum set of items aimed at helping scientific authors to report a wide array of systematic reviews and meta-analyses, primarily used to assess the benefits and harms of a health care ...
Allegations that part of a key 2006 study of Alzheimer's disease may have been fabricated has rocked the scientific research community.
In scientific inquiry and academic research, data fabrication is the intentional misrepresentation of research results. As with other forms of scientific misconduct , it is the intent to deceive that marks fabrication as unethical, and thus different from scientists deceiving themselves .
Five years later, in 1996, an expert panel appointed by the federal government found no evidence of scientific fraud and cleared Imanishi-Kari of misconduct, although the paper was not reinstated. [38] 1982 John Darsee. Fabricated results in the Cardiac Research Laboratory of Eugene Braunwald at Harvard in the early 1980s. Initially thought to ...