133 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9126718)
1. Baylor backed over 'falsified data' claims.
Dalton R
Nature; 1997 Apr; 386(6627):747. PubMed ID: 9126718
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. 'Misconduct' dispute raises fears of litigation.
Dalton R
Nature; 1997 Jan; 385(6612):105. PubMed ID: 8990102
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Scientific misconduct. Baylor saga comes to an end.
Kaiser J
Science; 1999 Feb; 283(5405):1091. PubMed ID: 10075561
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. 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]
5. The federal research misconduct regulations as viewed from the research universities.
Wright DE
Centen Rev; 1994; 38(2):249-72. PubMed ID: 11656759
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Neuroscientist accused of misconduct turns on his accusers.
Dalton R
Nature; 1998 Apr; 392(6675):424. PubMed ID: 9548238
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Study proposed on integrity of published data.
Gavaghan H
Nature; 1994 Oct; 371(6500):733. PubMed ID: 7935825
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Ruling brings cash windfall in US fraud case.
Dalton R
Nature; 1995 May; 375(6529):270. PubMed ID: 7753183
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Scientific misconduct. Back to the drawing board.
Anderson C
Nature; 1991 Mar; 350(6314):100. PubMed ID: 1848681
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Federal actions against plagiarism in research.
Price AR
J Infor Ethics; 1996; 5(1):34-51. PubMed ID: 11653389
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Definitions and boundaries of research misconduct: perspectives from a federal government viewpoint.
Price AR
J Higher Educ; 1994; 65(3):286-97. PubMed ID: 11653365
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. NIH office plans research on misconduct.
Dalton R
Nature; 1999 Jul; 400(6740):99. PubMed ID: 10408427
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Salem comes to the National Institutes of Health: notes from inside the crucible of scientific integrity.
Needleman HL
Pediatrics; 1992 Dec; 90(6):977-81. PubMed ID: 1331947
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Criminal liability for misconduct in scientific research.
Kuzma SM
Univ Mich J Law Reform; 1992; 25(2):357-421. PubMed ID: 11651584
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Scientific misconduct. Ill-defined, redefined.
Palca J
Hastings Cent Rep; 1996; 26(5):4. PubMed ID: 8891701
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. What to do about scientific misconduct.
Nature; 1994 May; 369(6478):261-2. PubMed ID: 8183349
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Federal panel endorses Baylor fraud claim.
Dalton R
Nature; 1999 Feb; 397(6720):549. PubMed ID: 10050835
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Scientific misconduct. Investigations on trial in a Texas court.
Marshall E
Science; 1999 Feb; 283(5404):913-4. PubMed ID: 10075554
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Giving scientists their due. The Imanishi-Kari decision.
Dresser R
Hastings Cent Rep; 1997; 27(3):26-8. PubMed ID: 9219021
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. The politics of research misconduct: congressional oversight, universities, and science.
LaFollette MC
J Higher Educ; 1994; 65(3):261-85. PubMed ID: 11653364
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
