ScienceGeist

Millions of Flickr images were sucked into a database called MegaFace. Now some of those faces may have the ability to sue.

Numerous recommendations and guidelines aim to improve the quality, timeliness and transparency of medical publications. However, these guidelines use ambiguous language that can be challenging to interpret, particularly for speakers of English as a second language. Cultural expectations within the Asia-Pacific region raise additional challenges and several studies have suggested that awareness and application of ethical publication practices in the Asia-Pacific region is relatively low compared with other regions. However, guidance on applying ethical publication practice guidelines in the Asia-Pacific region is lacking. This commentary aims to improve publication practices in the Asia-Pacific region by providing guidance on applying the 10 principles of the Good Publication Practice 3 (GPP3) guidelines and the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) criteria for authorship. Recommendations are provided for encore presentations, applying the ICMJE authorship criteria in the context of regional cultural expectations, and the role of study sponsors and professional medical writers. Ongoing barriers to compliance with guidelines are also highlighted, and additional guidance is provided to support authors submitting manuscripts for publication. The roles of regional journals, regulatory authorities and professional bodies in improving practices are also discussed.

"We are at a crisis point," according to a new report from the highly respected Brennan Center for Justice, "with almost weekly violations of previously respected safeguards."

Nonpartisan taskforce of ex-government officials reports 'almost weekly violations' of norms meant to safeguard objective research.

The answer bears on whether a study about lionfish social behavior, published in Biology Letters in 2014, was fabricated.

Carlos Lopez-Otin Nature is rescinding an award to a Spanish researcher whose group has at least nine retractions for problems with their published images. 

The primary goal of research is to advance knowledge. For that knowledge to benefit research and society, it must be trustworthy. Trustworthy research is robust, rigorous and transparent at all stages of design, execution and reporting. The authors developed the Hong Kong Principles (HKP) with a specific focus on the need to drive research improvement through ensuring that researchers are explicitly recognized and rewarded for behavior that leads to trustworthy research. 

Study investigated 19 topics related to transparency in reporting and research integrity. Only three topics were addressed in more than one third of scientific journals' Instructions to Authors.

In the past month, PLOS ONE and Transplantation have retracted fifteen studies by authors in China because of suspicions that the authors may have used organs from executed prisoners.

At turns lauded and vilified, the humble egg is an example of everything wrong with nutrition studies.

Global effort to combat research misconduct gathers pace.

One recent case, in which a scientist claims his submitted manuscript was rejected despite a lack of actual plagiarism, highlights the limitations of automated tools.

How a simple nudge can improve health and nutrition reporting. The Twitter account retweets science articles, adding “IN MICE.”

All researchers should strive to improve the quality, relevance and reliability of their work.

Academics and editors need to stop pretending that software always catches recycled text and start reading more carefully, says Debora Weber-Wulff.

Research needs an authoritative forum to hash out collective problems, argue C. K. Gunsalus, Marcia K. McNutt and colleagues.

The newish 'quarterly review of science' sometimes muddies the waters between science and political ideology. It is funded by Peter Thiel.

Concern for and interest in research integrity has increased significantly during recent decades, both in academic and in policy discourse.

Scientific journals' creation of dedicated positions for rooting out misconduct before publication comes amid growing awareness of such issues.

Almost 90% of academic clinical trials are not reported promptly to European registry.

The pharmaceutical industry gets a bad press. Some of the criticism is surely deserved, but the widespread notion that academia is morally superior is ridiculous, says Richard Grant.

The new version of the Netherlands Code of Conduct for Research Integrity will be published today.

The battle for evidence-based reason may have to move elsewhere, says Jenny Rohn.

Scientists have the public’s trust, so the swell of fake news shouldn’t put them off communicating, says CEO of Science Media Centre.

How the World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology became a multimillion dollar organization promoting bullshit science through fake conferences and journals.

Granting bodies have to do more to stop corporate money from distorting science, says Linda Bauld.

University manipulated test scores for more than a decade to ensure more men became doctors.

An ambitious project that set out nearly 5 years ago to replicate experiments from 50 high-impact cancer biology papers, but gradually shrank that number, now expects to complete just 18 studies.

Oaths have their value, but checklists will help put principles into practice.