Preface |
|
xi | |
Prologue |
|
xv | |
Acknowledgements |
|
xxvii | |
|
1 Research strategies in the biomedical sciences |
|
|
1 | (36) |
|
|
1 | (4) |
|
The range and classification of available methods |
|
|
5 | (2) |
|
Observational human studies |
|
|
7 | (9) |
|
Animal and in vitro experiments |
|
|
16 | (5) |
|
Human experimental studies |
|
|
21 | (4) |
|
Quality assessment of human trials |
|
|
25 | (1) |
|
|
26 | (4) |
|
Decision-making and hierarchies of evidence |
|
|
30 | (4) |
|
National institute for health and clinical excellence (NICE) |
|
|
34 | (1) |
|
|
35 | (2) |
|
2 Case studies of scientific errors |
|
|
37 | (20) |
|
Case study 1 Sleeping position and cot death |
|
|
37 | (3) |
|
Case study 2 The protein gap |
|
|
40 | (5) |
|
Case study 3 Defective brown fat thermogenesis as an important cause of obesity |
|
|
45 | (4) |
|
Case study 4 Antioxidants supplements to increase life expectancy |
|
|
49 | (5) |
|
|
54 | (3) |
|
3 More general concerns about scientific credibility |
|
|
57 | (24) |
|
Are most published research findings wrong? |
|
|
57 | (7) |
|
An avalanche of junk papers |
|
|
64 | (1) |
|
Why is so much published data irreproducible? |
|
|
65 | (8) |
|
Is all published research useful? |
|
|
73 | (4) |
|
|
77 | (4) |
|
4 The accused -- case studies of scientists accused of research misconduct |
|
|
81 | (52) |
|
|
81 | (3) |
|
|
84 | (2) |
|
|
86 | (2) |
|
|
88 | (1) |
|
|
89 | (2) |
|
|
91 | (3) |
|
|
94 | (3) |
|
|
97 | (2) |
|
|
99 | (3) |
|
|
102 | (1) |
|
|
103 | (1) |
|
John William Heslop Harrison |
|
|
104 | (1) |
|
|
105 | (2) |
|
|
107 | (3) |
|
|
110 | (1) |
|
|
111 | (2) |
|
|
113 | (1) |
|
|
114 | (3) |
|
|
117 | (1) |
|
|
118 | (2) |
|
|
120 | (2) |
|
|
122 | (2) |
|
|
124 | (9) |
|
5 Research fraud overview |
|
|
133 | (16) |
|
|
133 | (1) |
|
How common is research fraud? |
|
|
134 | (1) |
|
Is research fraud becoming more common? |
|
|
135 | (1) |
|
The harm done by research fraud -- why it matters |
|
|
136 | (9) |
|
The publication process: how is the accuracy and integrity of the scientific record maintained? |
|
|
145 | (1) |
|
|
146 | (3) |
|
6 Protection -- barriers to the publication of fraudulent data |
|
|
149 | (20) |
|
|
149 | (6) |
|
Peer review by co-authors, referees and editors |
|
|
155 | (12) |
|
|
167 | (2) |
|
7 Detection: identifying fraud after publication |
|
|
169 | (14) |
|
Faith in the efficacy of peer review and replication |
|
|
169 | (1) |
|
Encouraging and protecting potential whistle-blowers |
|
|
170 | (3) |
|
|
173 | (1) |
|
Indicators of fraudulent papers and fraudulent scientists |
|
|
174 | (6) |
|
|
180 | (3) |
|
8 Disinfection and measures for minimising the impact of research fraud |
|
|
183 | (20) |
|
|
183 | (1) |
|
One confirmed act of fraud should trigger a wider investigation |
|
|
183 | (1) |
|
Who should investigate accusations of research fraud? |
|
|
184 | (7) |
|
Indications that data has been fabricated |
|
|
191 | (3) |
|
Interviews with co-authors |
|
|
194 | (1) |
|
Life after death -- continuing influence of retracted papers |
|
|
195 | (2) |
|
What can be done to improve the situation? |
|
|
197 | (4) |
|
|
201 | (2) |
Index |
|
203 | |