Scientific Misconduct and how do Journal Editors deal with it?

PAD seminar WSU, December 2013

Scientific Misconduct and how do Journal Editors deal with it?

Graham C. Parker, Ph.D.The Carman and Ann Adams Department of Pediatrics

Wayne State University School of Medicine Children's Hospital of Michigan

Editor-in-Chief Executive Editor


The Public Health Service rule defines misconduct as:

Fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism in proposing, performing, or reviewing research, or in reporting research results.

(a) Fabrication is making up data or results and recording or reporting them.

(b) Falsification is manipulating research materials, equipment, or processes, or changing or omitting data or results such that the research is not accurately represented in the research record.

(c) Plagiarism is the appropriation of another person's ideas, processes, results, or words without giving appropriate credit.

(d) Research misconduct does not include honest error or differences of opinion. (42 C.F.R. 93.103)

http://dir.niehs.nih.gov/ethics/news/2005fall-news.doc

http://www.ori.dhhs.gov/documents/FR_Doc_05-9643.shtml

What is Scientific Misconduct?


FabricationEditor for a day


Falsification


Pereant qui ante nos nostra dixeruntAttributed to Aelius Donatus

by St. Jerome


1) to pass off the ideas or words of another as one's own.

2) to use another's work without crediting the source.

3) failing to put a quotation in quotation marks.

4) to present as new and original an idea or product derived from an existing source.

5) giving incorrect information about the source of a quotation.

6) changing words but copying the sentence structure of a source without giving credit.

http://www.turnitin.com/research_site/e_what_is_plagiarism.html

What is Plagiarism?


Self-Plagiarism

Can’t steal from yourself.


Ease of Detection

“a more classic romance of signaling elements” But the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

35,800,000 hits

“But the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.”4,690 hits

"But the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence." stem cells2 hits


Ease of Detection

• Image manipulation detection software• Plagiarism detection software



Ease of Detection

Other people are watching…• Clare Francis…• Deja Vu: a Database of Highly Similar Citations*• http://retractionwatch.wordpress.com


• Author inclusion / exclusion• Simultaneous submissions• Salami publications

Dear Dr. Parker,I am quite shocked with your message. This manuscript is totally novel and of interest to the field. By the way, what is your impact factor, 10 or so?

• Inappropriate reviewer recommendation• Listing an appropriate reviewer with a fake email address

Other Indiscretions


Consequences


What happened next?

• Production of cloned dogs by decreasing the interval between fusion and activation during somatic cell nuclear transfer. Kim S, Park SW, Hossein MS, Jeong YW, Kim JJ, Lee E, Kim YW, Hyun SH, Shin T, Hwang WS. Mol Reprod Dev. 2009 May;76(5):483-9.

• Cloning missy: obtaining multiple offspring of a specific canine genotype by somatic cell nuclear transfer. Hossein MS, Jeong YW, Park SW, Kim JJ, Lee E, Ko KH, Kim HS, Kim YW, Hyun SH, Shin T, Hawthorne L, Hwang WS. Cloning Stem Cells. 2009 Mar;11(1):123-30.

• Birth of Beagle dogs by somatic cell nuclear transfer.

Hossein MS, Jeong YW, Park SW, Kim JJ, Lee E, Ko KH, Hyuk P, Hoon SS, Kim YW, Hyun SH, Shin T, Hwang WS. Anim Reprod Sci. 2008 Oct 22. [Epub ahead of print]

• Protocol for the recovery of in vivo matured canine oocytes based on once daily measurement of serum progesterone. Hossein MS, Jeong YW, Kim S, Kim JJ, Park SW, Jeong CS, Hyun SH, Hwang WS. Cloning Stem Cells. 2008 Sep;10(3):403-8.

• Anti-apoptotic effect of melatonin on preimplantation development of porcine parthenogenetic embryos. Choi J, Park SM, Lee E, Kim JH, Jeong YI, Lee JY, Park SW, Kim HS, Hossein MS, Jeong YW, Kim S, Hyun SH, Hwang WS. Mol Reprod Dev. 2008 Jul;75(7):1127-35.

• Effects of insulin-transferrin-selenium in defined and porcine follicular fluid supplemented IVM media on porcine IVF and SCNT embryo production. Jeong YW, Hossein MS, Bhandari DP, Kim YW, Kim JH, Park SW, Lee E, Park SM, Jeong YI, Lee JY, Kim S, Hwang WS.

Anim Reprod Sci. 2008 Jun;106(1-2):13-24. Epub 2007 Mar 30.

• The analysis of chromatin remodeling and the staining for DNA methylation and histone acetylation do not provide definitive indicators of the developmental ability of inter-species cloned embryos. Lee E, Kim JH, Park SM, Jeong YI, Lee JY, Park SW, Choi J, Kim HS, Jeong YW, Kim S, Hyun SH, Hwang WS. Anim Reprod Sci. 2008 May;105(3-4):438-50. Epub 2008 Jan 3.

• Effects of culture conditions and nuclear transfer protocols on blastocyst formation and mRNA expression in pre-implantation porcine embryos. McElroy SL, Kim JH, Kim S, Jeong YW, Lee EG, Park SM, Hossein MS, Koo OJ, Abul Hashem MD, Jang G, Kang SK, Lee BC, Hwang WS.

Theriogenology. 2008 Mar 1;69(4):416-25. Epub 2007 Dec 4.

• Beneficial effects of brain-derived neurotropic factor on in vitro maturation of porcine oocytes.

Lee E, Jeong YI, Park SM, Lee JY, Kim JH, Park SW, Hossein MS, Jeong YW, Kim S, Hyun SH, Hwang WS. Reproduction. 2007 Sep;134(3):405-14.

Endangered Wolves Cloned from Adult Somatic Cells

Min Kyu Kim, Goo Jang, Hyun Ju Oh, Fibrianto Yuda, Hye Jin Kim, Woo Suk Hwang, Mohammad Shamim Hossein, Joung Joo Kim, Nam Shik Shin, Sung Keun Kang, Byeong Chun Lee. Cloning and Stem Cells. April 2007, 9(1): 130-137. doi:10.1089/clo.2006.0034. Erratum in: Cloning Stem Cells. 2007 Autumn;9(3):450.


Consequences

• Individual Journal Editorial decisions

• The Office of Research Integrity publishing their names and misconduct in the Federal Register, disqualified from applying for grants for a determined period, require mentoring after determined period

• Dismissal

• Removal of board licenses

• Collateral damage to co-authors’ careers

• (Journal editor resigns in wake of retractions)

• Institutional Damage

• Peer feeding frenzy


Consequences

Concerns were raised by one of the co-authors, Luke Cormack, and after an investigation was conducted by the authors’ institution, The Queensland University of Technology, Stem Cells and Development is officially retracting the paper, A Chimeric Vitronectin: IGF-1 Protein Supports Feeder-Cell-Free and Serum-Free Culture of Human Embryonic Stem Cells, by Manton et al., from volume 19, issue 9 (pages 1298-1305).

The concerns center primarily on whether the images provided in Figure 1 show colonies of the stem cell line described at the passage stated stained for the marker listed. There were also related concerns with the PCR data included.

It is important to note that the corresponding author, KJ Manton, has denied deliberate wrongdoing. Stem Cells and Development acknowledges and appreciates the thoroughness of the investigation undertaken by Queensland University of Technology.

Stem Cells and Development believes that had the peer reviewers of the paper been aware of the extent and nature of the mistakes in the paper that apparently went undetected by the authors through an initial submission, two revisions, as well as galley proof, they would not have deemed the paper acceptable.

Stem Cells and Development is dedicated to the highest ethical standards of scientific publishing.

April 2nd 2012 April 5th April 18th April 18th May 3rd May 4th August 26thAllegation received Invite CA to comment Contact Institution Agree plan Full evidential response Acknowledge receipt QUT Report

November 11th December 23rd December 27th March 14th 2013 March 14th Ask QUT one more question Retraction published Retraction Watch First author requests to submit corrected version No.


Peer feeding frenzy


Consequences

• Eric T. Poehlman (2006) ordered to serve a year and a day in federal prison for using falsified data in federal research grants.

• Scott Reuben fabricated data in six drug trials. Sentenced to six months in prison (2010), ordered to pay a $5,000 fine, $361,932 in restitution to the drug companies that funded his research and to forfeit $50,000 in assets in the case. Undergoing three years of supervised release.

• Steven Eaton (April 2013) given a three-month prison term, making him the first person to serve time under a 1999 British law called the Good Laboratory Practice Regulations

• Diederik Stapel, Tilburg University fabricated data in dozens of studies, facing a criminal probe for his misuse of some 2.2 million euros (roughly $2.8 million U.S.) in government grant funding.

http://retractionwatch.wordpress.com


Cost to the field?

Mobley et al. (2013) A Survey on Data Reproducibility in Cancer Research Provides Insights into Our Limited Ability to Translate Findings from the Laboratory to the Clinic.

PLoS ONE 8(5): e63221.


Cost to the field?

• Retards scientific progress

• Misguides clinical treatment

• Diverts limited funds

• Diverts scientific efforts

• Saps public confidence

• Diminishes political support

• Discourages trainees


Avoiding Scientific Misconduct

• Keep careful notes, and keep drafts of work under preparation.Track changes, font selection, font colors, hard copies

• Write and record as if you expect to have to defend yourself.

• It’s also good working practice.

• Create and maintain a culture of good scientific practice.

Short cuts = cul-de-sac !


“A single lie destroys a whole reputation of integrity.”Baltasar Gracian

Consequences


Acknowledgements

The Carman and Ann Adams Department of PediatricsChildren’s Hospital of Michigan

Complaints and further questions:

[email protected]

I may not have gone where I intended to go, but I think I have ended up where I needed to be.

~ Douglas Adams


Documents

Scientific Misconduct and how do Journal Editors deal with it?