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.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

206 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 34932191)

  • 21. Factors associated with scientific misconduct and questionable research practices in health professions education.
    Maggio L; Dong T; Driessen E; Artino A
    Perspect Med Educ; 2019 Apr; 8(2):74-82. PubMed ID: 30915714
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Playing with Data--Or How to Discourage Questionable Research Practices and Stimulate Researchers to Do Things Right.
    Sijtsma K
    Psychometrika; 2016 Mar; 81(1):1-15. PubMed ID: 25820980
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Ethical Shades of Gray: International Frequency of Scientific Misconduct and Questionable Research Practices in Health Professions Education.
    Artino AR; Driessen EW; Maggio LA
    Acad Med; 2019 Jan; 94(1):76-84. PubMed ID: 30113363
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. New Classification of Research Misconduct from the Viewpoint of Truth, Trust, and Risk.
    Kuroki T
    Account Res; 2018; 25(7-8):404-408. PubMed ID: 30427209
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Questionable research practices in ecology and evolution.
    Fraser H; Parker T; Nakagawa S; Barnett A; Fidler F
    PLoS One; 2018; 13(7):e0200303. PubMed ID: 30011289
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. For how long and with what relevance do genetics articles retracted due to research misconduct remain active in the scientific literature.
    Dal-Ré R; Ayuso C
    Account Res; 2021 Jul; 28(5):280-296. PubMed ID: 33124464
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. How many scientists fabricate and falsify research? A systematic review and meta-analysis of survey data.
    Fanelli D
    PLoS One; 2009 May; 4(5):e5738. PubMed ID: 19478950
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Integrity in Biomedical Research: A Systematic Review of Studies in China.
    Yi N; Nemery B; Dierickx K
    Sci Eng Ethics; 2019 Aug; 25(4):1271-1301. PubMed ID: 29721845
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Perceptions of occurrence of research misconduct and related factors among Kenyan investigators engaged in HIV research.
    Were E; Kaguiri E; Kiplagat J
    Account Res; 2020 Aug; 27(6):372-389. PubMed ID: 32324050
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Research Misconduct in the Croatian Scientific Community: A Survey Assessing the Forms and Characteristics of Research Misconduct.
    Pupovac V; Prijić-Samaržija S; Petrovečki M
    Sci Eng Ethics; 2017 Feb; 23(1):165-181. PubMed ID: 26940319
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Ethical Consistency and Experience: An Attempt to Influence Researcher Attitudes Toward Questionable Research Practices Through Reading Prompts.
    Bruton SV; Brown M; Sacco DF
    J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics; 2020 Jul; 15(3):216-226. PubMed ID: 31865855
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Individual, institutional, and scientific environment factors associated with questionable research practices in the reporting of messages and conclusions in scientific health services research publications.
    Gerrits RG; Mulyanto J; Wammes JD; van den Berg MJ; Klazinga NS; Kringos DS
    BMC Health Serv Res; 2020 Sep; 20(1):828. PubMed ID: 32883306
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Scientists Admitting to Plagiarism: A Meta-analysis of Surveys.
    Pupovac V; Fanelli D
    Sci Eng Ethics; 2015 Oct; 21(5):1331-52. PubMed ID: 25352123
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Effect of medical researchers' creative performance on scientific misconduct: a moral psychology perspective.
    Zhang N; Guo M; Jin C; Xu Z
    BMC Med Ethics; 2022 Dec; 23(1):137. PubMed ID: 36529728
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Scientific misconduct. How prevalent is fraud? That's a million-dollar question.
    Marshall E
    Science; 2000 Dec; 290(5497):1662-3. PubMed ID: 11186377
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Cycles of invisibility: The limits of transparency in dealing with scientific misconduct.
    Hesselmann F; Reinhart M
    Soc Stud Sci; 2021 Jun; 51(3):414-438. PubMed ID: 33234058
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. 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]  

  • 38. Research Integrity Among PhD Students at the Faculty of Medicine: A Comparison of Three Scandinavian Universities.
    Hofmann B; Bredahl Jensen L; Eriksen MB; Helgesson G; Juth N; Holm S
    J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics; 2020 Oct; 15(4):320-329. PubMed ID: 32532174
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Is it time to revise the definition of research misconduct?
    Resnik DB
    Account Res; 2019 Feb; 26(2):123-137. PubMed ID: 30649967
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. In Their Own Words: Research Misconduct from the Perspective of Researchers in Malaysian Universities.
    Olesen AP; Amin L; Mahadi Z
    Sci Eng Ethics; 2018 Dec; 24(6):1755-1776. PubMed ID: 29249021
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 11.