189 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 7627310)
1. Legal protections for the scientific misconduct whistleblower.
Poon P
J Law Med Ethics; 1995; 23(1):88-94. PubMed ID: 7627310
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. 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]
3. The assault on David Baltimore.
Kevles DJ
New Yorker; 1996 May; 72(13):94-98, 100-104, 106-109. PubMed ID: 11654450
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. Of whistleblowers, investigators, and judges.
Scarr S; Ernhart CB
Ethics Behav; 1993; 3(2):199-206. PubMed ID: 11652255
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Clearing of researcher in 'Baltimore affair' boosts demand for reforms.
Steele F
Nature; 1996 Jun; 381(6585):719-20. PubMed ID: 8657264
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Developing a federal policy on research misconduct.
Francis S
Sci Eng Ethics; 1999 Apr; 5(2):261-72. PubMed ID: 11657864
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Academic and scientific misconduct: issues for nursing educators.
Hansen BC; Hansen KD
J Prof Nurs; 1995; 11(1):31-9. PubMed ID: 7844280
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. On being a whistleblower: the Needleman case.
Ernhart CB; Scarr S; Geneson DF
Ethics Behav; 1993; 3(1):73-93. PubMed ID: 11653083
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. How congressional pressure shaped the 'Baltimore case'.
Friedly J
Science; 1996 Aug; 273(5277):873-5. PubMed ID: 8711476
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. The fallout: what happens to whistleblowers and those accused but exonerated of scientific misconduct?
Lubalin JS; Matheson JL
Sci Eng Ethics; 1999 Apr; 5(2):229-50. PubMed ID: 11657861
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Encouraging accountability in research: a pilot assessment of training efforts.
Mastroianni AC; Kahn JP
Account Res; 1999; 7(1):85-100. PubMed ID: 11657564
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Scientific misconduct. Ill-defined, redefined.
Palca J
Hastings Cent Rep; 1996; 26(5):4. PubMed ID: 8891701
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Ensuring scientific integrity in research: aspects of fairness and justice.
Green HP
Account Res; 1993; 3(2-3):209-13. PubMed ID: 11652295
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Scientific misconduct. ORI report tracks gun-shy feds.
Kaiser J
Science; 1999 May; 284(5416):901. PubMed ID: 10357668
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. A costly settlement ends whistle-blower suit.
Taubes G
Science; 1994 Feb; 263(5147):605. PubMed ID: 8303265
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Policing fraud and deceit: the legal aspects of misconduct in scientific inquiry.
Protti M
J Infor Ethics; 1996; 5(1):59-71. PubMed ID: 11653390
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Spring helps research integrity report resurface.
Marwick C
JAMA; 1996 Mar; 275(10):746. PubMed ID: 8598578
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. The American experience: lessons learned.
Rhoades LJ
Sci Eng Ethics; 2000 Jan; 6(1):95-107. PubMed ID: 11273443
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Scientific misconduct: a form of white coat crime.
Kline S
J Pharm Law; 1993; 2(1):15-34. PubMed ID: 11653114
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Federal agency says two universities did not provide full details in misconduct case: U.S. ex. rel. Condie v. Univ. of California, Univ. of Utah, and Ninnemann (Part III).
Maloney DM
Hum Res Rep; 1996 Sep; 11(9):4-5. PubMed ID: 11660228
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
