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.
117 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 31040415)
1. What your research-integrity officer would like you to know. Garfinkel S; Rupp DE; Qualkenbush L; Lehmann C Nature; 2019 May; 569(7754):40. PubMed ID: 31040415 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. What to do about scientific misconduct. Nature; 1994 May; 369(6478):261-2. PubMed ID: 8183349 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Enhancing research integrity. Richman VV; Richman A CMAJ; 2007 Aug; 177(4):375. PubMed ID: 17698830 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. Academy warns against slipping ethics. Anderson C Science; 1994 Feb; 263(5148):747. PubMed ID: 8303286 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. Research misconduct and the scientific process: continuing quality improvement. Koppelman-White E Account Res; 2006; 13(3):225-46. PubMed ID: 17124759 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Scientific misconduct. Panels look for common ground. Kaiser J Science; 1996 Apr; 272(5261):476. PubMed ID: 8614789 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Scientific misconduct: ORI survey is flawed. Teitelbaum SL Nature; 2002 Dec 19-26; 420(6917):739-40. PubMed ID: 12490917 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Scientific misconduct: the state's role has limits. Korn D Nature; 2002 Dec 19-26; 420(6917):739. PubMed ID: 12490916 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Scientific fraud: Europe must address research misconduct. Bosch X Nature; 2011 Dec; 480(7376):181. PubMed ID: 22158229 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Improving research misconduct policies: Evidence from social psychology could inform better policies to prevent misconduct in research. Redman BK; Caplan AL EMBO Rep; 2017 Apr; 18(4):511-514. PubMed ID: 28283533 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Tie funding to research integrity. Titus S; Bosch X Nature; 2010 Jul; 466(7305):436-7. PubMed ID: 20651673 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Cooperate to stop misconduct. Qualkenbush L Nature; 2018 May; 557(7707):637. PubMed ID: 29849159 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. From Baltimore to Bell Labs: reflections on two decades of debate about scientific misconduct. Resnik DB Account Res; 2003; 10(2):123-35. PubMed ID: 14577424 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. US science academy leaders approve plan to expel sexual harassers. Reardon S Nature; 2019 May; 569(7755):168. PubMed ID: 31065080 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. The definition of misconduct in science: a view from NSF. Buzzelli DE Science; 1993 Jan; 259(5095):584-5, 647-8. PubMed ID: 8430300 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. National academy. New report triggers changes in the NRC. Lawler A Science; 2000 Sep; 289(5484):1443-5. PubMed ID: 10991723 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Defining research misconduct: will we know it when we see it? Dresser R Hastings Cent Rep; 2001; 31(3):31-2. PubMed ID: 11478122 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. China introduces sweeping reforms to crack down on academic misconduct. Cyranoski D Nature; 2018 Jun; 558(7709):171. PubMed ID: 29895918 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Scientific integrity: a review of the Institute of Medicine's (IOM) reports. James N; Burrage J; Smith B Nurs Outlook; 2003; 51(5):239-41. PubMed ID: 14569231 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]