You don't need to be signed in to read BMJ Group Blogs, but you can register here to receive updates about other BMJ Group products and services via our Group site.

Liz Wager

Liz Wager: Show us the data (part 2)

12 Aug, 13 | by BMJ Group

Liz Wager My last blog started with the observation that it’s impossible to investigate research fraud unless you have the raw data. While that may seem obvious, it leads logically onto another, subtly different, point which often seems to be missed: that it’s impossible to spot many types of research fraud unless you have seen the raw data. Some problems, such as plagiarism, or blatant image manipulation, can be picked up by keen-eyed reviewers or editors, especially if they use screening tools such as CrossCheck. But fabricated or falsified data usually cannot be spotted from the aggregate data reported in journal articles. more…

Liz Wager: Show us the data

7 Aug, 13 | by BMJ

Liz WagerIt’s almost impossible to investigate suspected fraud unless you have access to the raw data. That may seem pretty obvious, but it raises the more interesting question of who should be responsible for looking after these data and making sure they are available, if needed.

Cases that frustrated journal editors brought to COPE (the Committee on Publication Ethics) in which authors claimed that their data had, rather conveniently, been destroyed by lab fires, floods, or catastrophic computer crashes, or more bizarrely, eaten by termites, have made me realise that this task cannot be left to researchers. And, while I’m sceptical about the disasters that sometimes appear to strike as soon as an author is confronted with suspicions, let’s not forget that disasters can occur, even to honest researchers, which makes it sensible to store data safely, even if there’s no whiff of misconduct. more…

Liz Wager: Trouble with retractions

1 Jul, 13 | by BMJ

Liz WagerRetracting unreliable publications can cause headaches for journal editors and a recent case illustrates why they can be so tricky. According to reports in the BMJ and Nature, the drug company GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) has requested the retraction of an article published in Nature Medicine in 2010 describing cell biology experiments funded by the company and carried out by employees. The company has stated that data were misrepresented and has fired one of the co-authors and suspended others. But the sacked author, while admitting mistakes in the figures, claims that these were honest errors which don’t affect the study’s conclusions (in which case, they would normally be handled by a correction rather than a retraction). more…

Liz Wager: What is the UK’s framework for research integrity?

4 Apr, 13 | by BMJ Group

Liz Wager An item in The Lancet last week (Godecharle et al. Lancet 2013;381:10097-8) bemoans the lack of a regulatory framework for research integrity in Europe. The confusion is neatly illustrated by a map categorising countries by how they handle misconduct. The UK falls into the second best category, along with Germany and Sweden, of countries that have a “national framework.” Only Denmark and Norway are in the top category of countries that have a framework established by law. more…

Liz Wager: Follow the rules—as soon as we’ve written them

15 Jan, 13 | by BMJ Group

Liz WagerOne of my most vivid schoolday memories is of being told off for doing something I didn’t know was forbidden. My crime was “running in the school corridors” which seemed perfectly reasonable behaviour to me (as I was late for a lesson), but which apparently was against the school rules. I can still remember my burning seven year old fury at such injustice. So I sympathise with authors who are accused by editors of breaking “rules” they didn’t know existed. more…

Liz Wager: You can call me 0000-0002-4202-7813

7 Jan, 13 | by BMJ

Liz WagerI just registered for an ORCID ID—I’m 0000-0002-4202-7813 in case you were wondering, but I still answer to Liz. I know I’ve written about ORCID before, but that was before it was launched, and I think it’s such a neat idea I’ve decided to blog about it again now it is up and running and I’ve tried it out for myself.

ORCID gives researchers a unique ID which will not only be useful to them, but also to publishers, funders, and institutions. I’m also convinced that it will make some investigations into suspected research and publication misconduct easier, because it will make it simpler to identify an individual researcher’s publications and easily distinguish them from others with similar names. more…

Liz Wager: Discussing research misconduct with Dr Hwang

17 Dec, 12 | by BMJ

Liz WagerIn a country where over half the population is called Kim, Park, or Lee, it probably shouldn’t have come as such a surprise to find myself talking about research misconduct with Dr Hwang in South Korea. Although he shares a name with a researcher notorious for fraud, this Dr Hwang is busy running courses on research integrity to make sure his namesake’s exploits don’t occur again.

Apparently, the South Korean government has put money behind several initiatives to reduce misconduct. There is a national website with links to resources including the COPE flowcharts, which have been translated into Korean. They are also working on making sure that every university has a committee or individual responsible for research ethics—I got a bit lost in the details, but I’m pretty sure these are different from the committees (or IRBs) that review research proposals, but these have also been reformed and strengthened in recent years. more…

Liz Wager: Guidelines for misconduct?

6 Sep, 12 | by BMJ

Liz WagerI’m generally a big fan of guidelines—in fact, I’ve written a few myself, but a recent conversation with a wise Indian researcher made me ponder their darker side. We were talking about research integrity and he explained how he endeavours to embed this into every stage of the research process at his institution, from the initial ethics committee (IRB) approval right through to publication. He believes that ethical considerations, as well as reporting standards, need to be emphasised at every stage. If this doesn’t happen, then well-meaning guidelines might actually teach poor researchers how to be dishonest or help them cover their misdeeds. more…

Liz Wager: An ORCID by any other name would smell as sweet

1 Aug, 12 | by BMJ

Liz Wager

The BMJ recently had to apologise for having published a picture of a Japanese doctor called Dr Yoshitaka Fujii which turned out not to show the Dr Yoshitaka Fujii who has hit the headlines recently because of research fraud leading to the retraction of a record number of publications but his namesake.

This embarrassing mistake is a good illustration of a serious problem in the medical (and no doubt other kinds of ) literature: trying to distinguish authors who have the same name. I’m pretty lucky in this respect, in that I have a taken my husband’s rather unusual name (Wagers are positively an endangered species compared to Smiths, Wangs, and Kims), and also because I publish in a relatively obscure field (journalology and publication ethics) from my one-woman company. So the chance of finding another E Wager writing about publication ethics from Princes Risborough is pretty low. But if you have a family name that’s very prevalent, and you work in a big field (say, oncology or cardiology), or a massive institution, it can be a real problem to ensure that credit or blame goes to the right person. Other problems include variants caused by transliteration between alphabets (e.g. Piotr or Peter, Tchaikovsky or Chaikovsky), accents (which disappear capriciously in certain fonts), and people who change their names. more…

Liz Wager: Deworming the literature

26 Jul, 12 | by BMJ

Liz Wager

A recent Cochrane systematic review caught my eye, not so much for its conclusions but for what it shows about the state of the medical literature.

According to Paul Garner, one of the review’s authors, they found a study on nearly 28,000 children, which was published in the BMJ in 2006, which concluded that deworming preschool children in Uganda helped them gain weight but, in fact, when correctly analysed, showed no significant difference. They also found that the largest study, of a million Indian children, carried out in 2004, had never been published. more…

BMJ blogs homepage

BMJ.com

Helping doctors make better decisions. Visit site



Creative Comms logo

Latest from BMJ.com

Latest from BMJ.com

Latest from BMJ.com podcasts

Latest from BMJ.com podcasts

Blogs linking here

Blogs linking here