权益分类	功能权益	普通用户	{{item.name}}会员
{{category.name}}	{{benefitItem.name}}

Judging the Medics' Science: Misconduct and Research Culture in Disciplinary Proceedings since 1990

判断医学界的科学：自 1990 年以来纪律程序中的不当行为和研究文化

基本信息

批准号：
AH/J008338/1
负责人：
Marie-Andree Jacob
金额：
$ 7.72万
依托单位：
Keele University
依托单位国家：
英国
项目类别：
Fellowship
财政年份：
2012
资助国家：
英国
起止时间：
2012 至无数据
项目状态：
已结题

来源：
https://gtr.ukri.org/projects?ref=AH%2FJ008338%2F1
关键词：
Judging Medics Science Misconduct Research

项目摘要

What does 'bad science' mean? In the UK and abroad, science investigators and medical doctors are increasingly subject to close scrutiny. But what happens when these are the same people: what does 'bad science' mean for medical doctors who pursue scientific research, and at the same time wear a professional hat as carers for patients under a public health system? In a 2011 report the Science and Technology Committee of the House of Commons has characterised the governance of scientific conduct as 'unsatisfactory.' On the international scene, many organisations and committees are increasingly working to prevent and respond to research misconduct and fraud. This study will be designed to inform current policy debates on this issue of great public concern.This project will help to democratize science, by enhancing public understandings of trust, professionalism, integrity but also misconduct, in science. It also seeks to broaden the terms of the debates on scientific research. It does so by examining the role of the General Medical Council (and closely related decision-making bodies) in securing legitimate research conduct in the area of UK medicine. The project will span two decades, ranging from the 'first' widely publicised science fraud case in the UK, a case of paper fabrication and improper authorship attribution involving obstetrician Malcolm Pearce, up until the saga of Andrew Wakefield's research on the link between MMR vaccines and autism, and other current developments. The aims of the project include: 1. to offer the first comprehensive analysis of General Medical Council's decisions about scientific misconduct in medical research, for the period 1990-2010, and 2. more broadly speaking, to understand what constitutes misconduct, ethics, and integrity in medical science in their cultural contexts.Through close reading, legal analysis and critique of the different cases, in this project I will thus explore the cultural aspects of scientific conduct and misconduct. These cultural aspects include the recent breakdown of trust in the medical profession's autonomy, and public expectations of transparency in science.The project will provide 'thinking tools' to engage the public as well as practitioners and other stakeholders about issues of scientific conduct and misconduct. It will also enable the identification of good and bad practices in the area of research governance, and inform policy reforms to better tackle the problems of scientific misconduct.

“坏科学”是什么意思？在英国和国外，科学研究人员和医生越来越受到严格审查。但是，当这些人是同一个人时，会发生什么：对于追求科学研究、同时在公共卫生系统下充当患者护理人员的专业医生来说，“糟糕的科学”意味着什么？在 2011 年的一份报告中，下议院科学技术委员会将科学行为的治理描述为“令人不满意”。在国际舞台上，许多组织和委员会越来越多地致力于预防和应对研究不当行为和欺诈。这项研究旨在为当前公众关注的这一问题的政策辩论提供信息。该项目将通过增强公众对科学领域的信任、专业精神、诚信以及不当行为的理解，帮助科学民主化。它还寻求扩大科学研究辩论的范围。它通过审查总医学委员会（以及密切相关的决策机构）在确保英国医学领域合法研究行为方面的作用来实现这一目标。该项目将跨越二十年，从英国“第一例”广泛宣传的科学欺诈案、涉及产科医生马尔科姆·皮尔斯的论文捏造和不当作者归属案，一直到安德鲁·韦克菲尔德关于 MMR 疫苗与自闭症之间联系的研究传奇，以及其他当前进展。该项目的目标包括：1. 对 1990-2010 年间医学研究中的科学不端行为做出的决定进行首次全面分析；2. 更广泛地说，了解在其文化背景下什么构成医学科学中的不端行为、道德和诚信。通过仔细阅读、法律分析和对不同案例的批评，在这个项目中，我将探讨科学行为和不端行为的文化方面。这些文化方面包括最近对医疗行业自主权信任的崩溃，以及公众对科学透明度的期望。该项目将提供“思维工具”，让公众、从业者和其他利益相关者参与科学行为和不当行为问题。它还将有助于识别研究治理领域的良好和不良做法，并为政策改革提供信息，以更好地解决科学不端行为问题。