These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
25. So you suspect someone of fraud. What now? Powell K Nat Med; 2006 May; 12(5):492. PubMed ID: 16675983 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
26. Integrity and misconduct in research. Blancett SS J Nurs Adm; 1996 May; 26(5):7-8. PubMed ID: 8627395 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
27. Sitting in judgement. Check E Nature; 2002 Sep; 419(6905):332-3. PubMed ID: 12353003 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
28. The history and future of the Office of Research Integrity: Scientific Misconduct and Beyond. Pascal CB Sci Eng Ethics; 1999 Apr; 5(2):183-98. PubMed ID: 11657856 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
29. Your own desktop crime lab. Powell K Nat Med; 2006 May; 12(5):493. PubMed ID: 16675984 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
30. Research misconduct: Can Australia learn from the UK's stuttering system? Marcovitch H Med J Aust; 2006 Dec 4-18; 185(11-12):616-8. PubMed ID: 17181505 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Office of Research Integrity: a reflection of disputes and misunderstandings. Scheetz MD Croat Med J; 1999 Sep; 40(3):321-5. PubMed ID: 10523125 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Scientific misconduct: the lessons of time. Commentary on "The history and future of the Office of Research Integrity: scientific misconduct and beyond" (C. Pascal). Chubin DE Sci Eng Ethics; 1999 Apr; 5(2):199-202. PubMed ID: 11657857 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
33. Scientific misconduct and accountability in teams. Hussinger K; Pellens M PLoS One; 2019; 14(5):e0215962. PubMed ID: 31048907 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Assessing the seriousness of research misconduct: considerations for sanction assignment. Keranen L Account Res; 2006; 13(2):179-205. PubMed ID: 16830407 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. An Ethics of the System: Talking to Scientists About Research Integrity. Davies SR Sci Eng Ethics; 2019 Aug; 25(4):1235-1253. PubMed ID: 30251235 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Addressing research integrity challenges: from penalising individual perpetrators to fostering research ecosystem quality care. Zwart H; Ter Meulen R Life Sci Soc Policy; 2019 Jun; 15(1):5. PubMed ID: 31179512 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Due process in investigations of research misconduct. Mello MM; Brennan TA N Engl J Med; 2003 Sep; 349(13):1280-6. PubMed ID: 14507953 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
39. Misconduct Policies, Academic Culture and Career Stage, Not Gender or Pressures to Publish, Affect Scientific Integrity. Fanelli D; Costas R; Larivière V PLoS One; 2015; 10(6):e0127556. PubMed ID: 26083381 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Scientific misconduct. Hearing process proves a challenge for ORI. Anderson C Science; 1993 Jun; 260(5115):1714. PubMed ID: 8390094 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [Previous] [Next] [New Search]