Search

Currently, a large number of predatory journals have proliferated. Their purpose is to obtain fraudulent profits by promising the rapid publication of scientific works, without fulfilling the services of quality review. These publishers have managed to copy the models of open access journals, which is why they are increasingly difficult to identify, coupled with the fact that many of them have opened spaces in the most important indexes of scientific journals, such as Medline, Web of Science (WoS), Scopus, Embase, among others. These publishers cheat not only the authors of the research they intend to publish but also the readers and general public with publications that have not been reviewed and evaluated properly by a system of peers or academic experts. Therefore, the aim of this work is to make known some of the most common practices of predatory journals, so that anyone interested in the editorial process, whether as an author, editor or reader, has the elements to identify these fraudulent journals, and this bad practice in the editorial process. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Revista Colombiana de Bioetica is the property of Universidad El Bosque and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Introducción: La fabricación de datos, la falsificación y el plagio son consideradas formas graves de mala conducta científica. Objetivo: Identificar evidencias de mala conducta y las condiciones favorecedoras más comunes que perciben los residentes de las especialidades médicas de la Universidad de Ciencias Médicas de la Habana. Métodos: Investigación descriptiva transversal en la que fueron encuestados residentes de la Universidad de Ciencias Médicas de la Habana. Se aplicó un cuestionario sobre práctica de mala conducta científica en dos escenarios independientes (Clase regular y evaluación). Se trabajó con la variable inconducta científica y sus tipos y otras de tipo demográfica. Se realizó una prueba de asociación bayesiana con la versión 0.9 de la Biblioteca de R nombrada Bayes-Factor con los estándares predeterminados y un plan de muestreo multinomial con los totales de las columnas fijos. Bajo la hipótesis nula se asume que columna tienen las mismas probabilidades en la distribución multinomial. Resultados: El plagio fue el tipo de mala práctica más común seguida de la fabricación de datos y la falsificación de resultados. La prueba de asociación bayesiana realizada da como resultado una probabilidad de 0.309 (FB < 1) a favor de la Hipótesis nula que sugiere independencia entre las variables grupo e inconducta científica. Conclusiones: Existe evidencia que además del plagio otras formas de mala conducta científica como la fabricación y falsificación de resultados pueden estar presentes en nuestro medio. Sin embargo, este tipo de práctica es considerada injustificada por la generalidad de los entrevistados. La presión juega un papel importante como causa de inconducta científica y aumenta el riesgo cuando están presentes otros factores como la deshonestidad, el desconocimiento y desinterés.

Copyright of Revista Habanera de Ciencias Médicas is the property of Universidad de Ciencias Medicas de La Habana and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

This article aimed to contribute with essential elements, as well as practical examples, so that academic in the area of Education can to be wary of and uncover these false publications and avoid the negative consequences of publicizing your studies in fraudulent vehicles. Thus, the main characteristics of predatory journals are discussed, such as the absence of editors, nonexistent or fraudulent indexing, false impact factors, scarcity or absence of information about physical address, as well as the exiguity of how the editorial process of the predatory journal occurs. Thus, several real examples are presented of how this type of fraud is operationalized to deceive potential authors. It is important to note that there are about 485 predatory journals listed in QUALIS, and some of them have received high grades, such as A1 and A2 in certain areas of knowledge. It is essential that research and education institutions reflect on the phenomenon and help guide their academics so that resources are not wasted on this type of publication, nor researchers and faculty members gain scores with illegitimate predatory publications. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

El objetivo de este trabajo es analizar fallas a la integridad científica por parte de personal de investigación latinoamericano. Metodología: se realizaron cuestionarios anónimos y voluntarios después de trata este tema en 121 cursos de redacción científica/taller de tesis dictados en Latinoamérica, sobre todo en Argentina, durante 20 años (2001-2020). Resultados: l as 2064 r espuestas válidas mostraron que un 60 % tenía cinco o más años de egreso, 48,6 % señalaron coautoría indebida y 28,9 % que su nombre fue omitido de publicaciones. Un 24,9 % reconoció haber cometido alguna clase de mala conducta en su carrera. La coacción a que fue sometido para que lo hiciera fue reconocida por un 56,7 %. El 60,7 % de las 512 personas ignoraba que era un error. La coautoría indebida fue la mala conducta más frecuente (46 %), seguida de plagio y falseamiento de datos. En relatos conocidos de primera mano se destacan: publicación en salamín, duplicación y robo de datos, así como soborno y manipulación de imágenes. Ninguna de las personas que tomaron cursos previos de formación en bioética (0/560) cometieron motu propio actos inadecuados. Conclusión: el personal científico comete un porcentaje relativamente elevado de fallas a la integridad científica; impartir cursos de integridad científica tiene un fuerte rol en el autocontrol para evitarlas.

Objective: This work aims to analyze failures in scientific integrity on the part of Latin American research personnel. Methodology: anonymous and voluntary questionnaires were carried out after dealing with this topic in 121 scientific writing courses/thesis workshops in Latin America, mainly in Argentina, for 20 years (2001-2020). Results: The 2064 valid responses showed that 60% had five or more years of graduation, 48.6% indicated improper co-authorship, and 28.9% that their name was omitted from publications. 24.9% acknowledged having omitted their name from publications. Some 24.9% acknowledged having committed some misconduct in their career. The coercion to which he was subjected to do so was recognized by 56.7%. 60.7 % of the 512 people were unaware that it was a mistake. Misconduct was the most frequent misconduct (46 %), followed by plagiarism and misrepresentation of data. In first-hand accounts, salami publication, data duplication, theft, bribery, and image manipulation stand out. None of the persons who took previous bioethics training courses (0/560) committed inappropriate acts of their own accord. Conclusion: scientific personnel commits a relatively high percentage of scientific integrity failures; providing scientific integrity courses has a decisive role in self-monitoring to avoid them. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective. To describe the editorial processing time of published COVID-19 research articles and compare this with a similar topic, human influenza, and analyze the number of publications, withdrawals, and retractions. Methods. A descriptive-analytical study using PubMed on research articles with the MeSH terms human influenza and COVID-19. Time to acceptance (from submission to acceptance) and time to publication (from acceptance to publication) were compared. Retractions and withdrawals were reviewed both qualitatively and quantitatively. Results. There were 31 319 research articles on COVID-19 and 4 287 on human influenza published during 2020. The median time to acceptance for COVID-19 was lower than that for human influenza (8 vs. 92 days). The median time to publication for COVID-19 articles was shorter than those on human influenza (12 vs. 16 days); 47.0% of COVID-19 research articles were accepted within the first week of submission, and 19.5% within one day. There were 82 retractions and withdrawals for COVID-19 articles, 1 for human influenza, and 5 for articles that contain both terms; these were mainly related to ethical misconduct, and 27 (31.0%) were published by the same group of authors in one highest-quartile journal. Conclusions. The conundrum between fast publishing and adequate standards is shown in this analysis of COVID-19 research articles. The speed of acceptance for COVID-19 manuscripts was 11.5 times faster than for human influenza. The high number of acceptances within a day or week of submission and the number of retractions and withdrawals of COVID-19 papers might be a warning sign about the possible lack of a quality control process in scientific publishing and the peer review process. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Salud, Ciencia y Tecnología is the property of Fundacion Salud, Ciencia y Tecnologia and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Objective: To describe the biomedical journal characteristics that are associated with the retraction of papers. Method: A descriptive cross-sectional study was conducted. All papers retracted and indexed in PubMed from January 1st 2013 to December 31st, 2016 were included. We used nine main categories to classify retractions: aspects related with data, authors issues, plagiarism, unethical research, journal issues, review process, conflict of interest, other, and unknown. These categories were further classified as: misconduct, suspicion of misconduct, or no misconduct. Results: The proportion of retraction was 2.5 per 10,000 publications. Retractions appeared in 611 journals. During the study period, retraction due to misconduct was more frequent among journals with low-impact factor. Within these retracted publications, among low-impact journals the presence of misconduct was higher with a 73% compared to 61% for the high-impact journals (p = 0.001). There were differences in the percentage of retractions due to misconduct regarding the journal classification category (p

Fundamento: Para orientar esfuerzos y estrategias al logro de una conducta responsable en investigación, es de suma importancia conocer el estado de opinión de investigadores consolidados, de manera que se pueda esclarecer cómo se ven a sí mismos y cómo perciben el contexto en que se desempeñan.Objetivo: caracterizar la percepción de los profesores de universidades peruanas respecto a la conducta responsable en investigación.Métodos: estudio descriptivo, exploratorio, que incluyó a 70 docentes universitarios, pertenecientes a las respectivas cátedras de metodología de la investigación de tres universidades de Perú. En función de la variable conducta responsable en investigación, se establecieron tres dimensiones (conceptual, personal, institucional), con sus respectivos indicadores; y de estos, a su vez, derivaron las preguntas de una encuesta.Resultados: en la dimensión conceptual, se manifestó un escaso conocimiento acerca de situaciones de conducta no responsable en investigación en el 64,29 % de los docentes encuestados. Solo en el 28,6 % de los encuestados las respuestas evidenciaron que sí son responsables en el plano individual. En cuanto al rol de las instituciones educativas en general, la gran mayoría, el 58,6 %, expresó que estas muestran algún interés por el tema.Conclusión: los profesores de universidades peruanas perciben la conducta responsable en investigación como medianamente favorable. En su práctica individual, la mayoría no cumple con la totalidad de los principios éticos elementales al investigar. Respecto al papel de la universidad, el criterio que prevaleció fue que esta no muestra todo el interés que debería.

Introduction: The problems with the articles' authorship are frequent; however, in Cuba there are few investigations on the topic. Objective: To determine the authorship changes in the publication of works presented in medical student forums at national level in Cuba and its associated factors. Methods: Observational and cross-sectional study using analytical techniques, that included all the works presented in 2016, 2017 and 2019 editions of the medical student forums at national level. A Google Scholar search strategy was carried out in order to check if these works had been published in scientific journals. After, authorship changes were identified and associated factors were looked for. Prevalence ratios (aPR), 95 % confidence intervals (95 % CI) and p values using generalized linear models were obtained. Results: Of the 129 published works, 89,9 % (n= 116) had authorship changes. In the multivariate analysis, there was more frequency of authorship changes when the articles were published in professionals' journals (aPR: 1,29; IC 95 %: 1,11 - 1,50; p= 0,001) and when the publication occurred later to the event (aPR: 1,20; IC 95 %: 1,01 - 1,42; p= 0,042); that which was contrary when the corresponding author was a student (aPR: 0,79; IC 95 %: 0,66 - 0,95; p= 0,010), adjusted by three variables. Conclusion: Almost the entirety of the articles had authorship changes and some factors associated to a higher or smaller frequency in those changes were determined (publication, time and corresponding author).

Copyright of Revista Bioetica is the property of Conselho Federal de Medicina and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Ciencia e Innovación en Salud is the property of Universidad Simon Bolivar (USB) and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

La retracción es un mecanismo que permite la corrección de la literatura científica. Este artículo pretende demostrar que las retracciones han aumentado de manera progresiva, y sobresalen las del ámbito médico. Metodológicamente es un artículo de revisión bibliográfica, cuyos datos estadísticos se obtuvieron de estudios sobre artículos retractados, publicados entre el 2012 y el 2017, en inglés, desde las bases de datos de PubMed y Google Scholar. Entre los resultados sobresalientes se encuentran como causas más frecuentes de retracción: plagio, mala conducta, errores, fabricación y duplicación. La mayor incidencia reportada fue en Estados Unidos (EE. UU.), India, China, Japón y Alemania. El mayor índice de retracción fue para las revistas de factor de impacto bajo. El tiempo transcurrido para la retracción es largo, aunque ha disminuido. Esto permite que se citen estos artículos y se origine así una mala ciencia. Se concluye que se requiere de uniformidad en las notas y las reglas de retracción, así como señalizar de forma adecuada los artículos retractados, además de disminuir el tiempo para que esta se efectúe. En relación con la bioética, se revela un grave problema en la integridad de la literatura científica, así como un posible impacto de las retracciones en la salud de las personas.

This paper studies the reality of ethical and bioethical issues in the scientific world through an integrative literature review of articles included in three databases. Seven terms from the thesaurus Health Sciences Descriptors were used, from which three combinations were elaborated and used in the three databases. After applying inclusion requirements, a total of 18 articles were selected. Certain misconducts, particularly plagiarism, falsification and data fabrication, have been showing an increasing behavior, which requires more stringent measures in order to control such phenomenon and maintain scientific credibility before society and authorities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Foundation: For guiding efforts and strategies to achieve responsible research behavior, it is of utmost importance to know the state of established researcher's opinion, so that they can clarify how they see themselves and how they perceive the context in which they perform. Objective: to characterize the perception of Peruvian universities professors regarding the responsible behavior in research. Methods: descriptive, exploratory study, which included 70 university professors, belonging to the respective chairs of research methodology in three universities in Peru. Based on the variable responsible behavior in research, three dimensions were established (conceptual, personal, institutional), with their corresponding indicators; and from these, in turn, questions from a survey were derived. Results: in the conceptual dimension, there was little knowledge about situations of non-responsible behavior in research in 64.29% of the professors surveyed. Only in 28.6% show that they are individually responsible. Regarding the role of educational institutions in general, the vast majority, 58.6%, expressed that they show some interest in the topic. Conclusion: Peruvian universities professors perceive responsible behavior in research as moderately favorable. In their individual practice, most do not comply with all of the basic ethical principles when investigating. Regarding the role of the university, the prevailing criterion was that it does not show all the interest it should. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introducción. A nivel mundial, la producción sobre ética en la investigación empieza a ganar mayor relieve; no es conocido el estado de documentos publicados en las revistas biomédicas peruanas. Objetivos. Describir el estado del arte sobre ética en investigación en revistas biomédicas peruanas indizadas. Diseño. Estudio descriptivo transversal. Material. Publicaciones sobre ética en investigación en revistas biomédicas peruanas indizadas y publicadas en el período 2005-2015, y encontradas en la base de datos de LILACS y SciELO Perú. Intervenciones. Observación y análisis de los documentos publicados. Principales medidas de resultados. Frecuencia y porcentajes. Resultados. De 49 publicaciones entre 2005 a 2015, 20,4% (n=10) fueron realizadas el 2008, y 12,2% (n=6) en 2010 y 2011. De los documentos publicados, 24,5% (n=12) consistieron en la sección editorial, 22,4% (n=11) fueron cartas al editor y artículos originales. La éticabioética aplicada fue la más abordada, con 36,7% (n=18), seguido por la mala conducta científica, con 34,7% (n=17). Los temas menos estudiados fueron el aprendizaje-formación ética y el comité de ética, con 14,3% (n=7) cada uno. De las 10 revistas biomédicas peruanas indizadas, el de mayor producción fue la Revista Peruana de Medicina Experimental y Salud Pública, con 38,8% (n=19), seguida por la Revista Anales de la Facultad de Medicina, con 20,4% (n=10). Conclusiones. La publicación sobre ética en la investigación fue baja. Los documentos más publicados fueron las secciones editorial, cartas al editor y artículos originales. Los temas más estudiados fueron la ética-bioética aplicada y mala conducta científica.

La neutralidad en relación con la comunidad científica y publicación de resultados es esencial, en vista de que toda teoría aplicada en las diversas áreas del conocimiento es generada por in- vestigaciones científicas. La manipulación o falsificación de resultados es una de las prácticas más condenables, ya que difunde datos falsos o incorrectos. Este estudio evaluó si la produc- ción científica y la obtención de resultados estuvieron pautadas en la ética y en el principio de neutralidad, a través de una revisión integradora de la literatura. Los resultados demostraron que en el 100 % de los tr abajos seleccionados existe mala conducta científica, y que esta ha au- mentado significativamente en todo el mundo, siendo difícil su identificación. Los motivos más comunes para la falsificación de datos fueron la búsqueda de reconocimiento y la competencia en el medio académico. Por lo tanto, una conducta responsable y ética de sociedades y comités científicos, y editores de periódicos se torna imprescindible en la credibilidad de los resultados encontrados en las investigaciones científicas.

Copyright of Enfermeria Oncologica is the property of Sociedad Espanola de Enfermeria Oncologica and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The main causes of retraction of biomedical articles with affiliated authors in Spain, as well as factors to interpret this phenomenon are identified. A total of 132 retractations have been analyzed, being the first cause of retraction the fabrication/falsification of data. Duplicated or reused images, errors admitted and not malicious in the data or procedures, duplicate or fragmented articles, and plagiarism are also frequent retraction causes. Retractions are not frequent, accounting for only 0.11% of the production of Spanish authors. But beyond that, retractions are an important correction and alert mechanism for scientific publications that ensures the reliability of the medical literature, its quality and progress. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Retraction is a mechanism to correct scientific literature. This article aims to demonstrate that retractions have gradually increased, especially in the medical field. Methodologically, it is a literature review article whose statistical data were obtained from studies on retraction articles published in English between 2012 to 2017 in the PubMed and Google Scholar databases. Some of the most frequent causes of retraction found were plagiarism, misconduct, errors, fabrication and duplication. The highest incidence rate was reported in the United States, India, China, Japan and Germany. The highest retraction rate was for low-impact journals. The time for retraction is long but has decreased, which allows these articles to be cited and bad science to arise. It is concluded that uniformity is needed in notes and rules of retraction, retracted articles should be marked appropriately, and time for retraction must be reduced. In relation to bioethics, there is a serious problem in the integrity of scientific literature and a possible impact of retractions on the health of people. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Retractions of scientific articles are becoming the most relevant institution for making sense of scientific misconduct. An increasing number of retracted articles, mainly attributed to misconduct, is currently providing a new empirical basis for research about scientific misconduct. This article reviews the relevant research literature from an interdisciplinary context. Furthermore, the results from these studies are contextualized sociologically by asking how scientific misconduct is made visible through retractions. This study treats retractions as an emerging institution that renders scientific misconduct visible, thus, following up on the sociology of deviance and its focus on visibility. The article shows that retractions, by highlighting individual cases of misconduct and general policies for preventing misconduct while obscuring the actors and processes through which retractions are effected, produce highly fragmented patterns of visibility. These patterns resemble the bifurcation in current justice systems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Neutrality about the scientific community and publication of results are essential since all applied theory in different fields of knowledge is generated by scientific research. The manipulation or falsification of results is one of the most reprehensible practices, as it disseminates false or incorrect data. This study evaluated whether scientific production and the achievement of results were based on ethics and the principle of neutrality, through an integrative literature review. The results showed that 100% of the analyzed studies had scientific misconduct and that it has significantly increased worldwide getting difficult to identify. The most common reasons for data falsification were the quest for recognition and competition in the academic community. Therefore, a responsible conduct and ethical of societies, scientific committees, and journal editors become essential in the credibility of the results found in scientific research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Con el objetivo de plantear la necesaria reflexión moral sobre la responsabilidad personal que asume cada investigador cuando realiza investigación científica en seres humanos, se presenta un ensayo de temática científica y moral, utilizando información de la literatura científica y ética pertinentes. En torno a los conceptos de ética heterónoma y ética autónoma, se plantea que, en última instancia y allende el consentimiento Informado y los cursos de adiestramiento sobre ética en investigación, la conducta del/de la investigador/a dependerá de su propia responsabilidad moral puesta a prueba en diversos contextos situacionales. Se utilizan dos modelos explicativos para comprender esta dinámica, el de normalidad en salud mental y el del desarrollo moral del hombre. Se concluye que el proceso de investigación en seres humanos constituye una actividad científica y moral que, dependiendo de diversas situaciones de conflicto de interés, pondrá siempre a prueba los controles morales del investigador.In order to propose the necessary moral reflection about the personal responsibility that each researcher assumes when he performs scientific research in human beings, an essay of moral and scientific themes is presented, using information from the relevant scientific and ethical literature. Around the concepts of heteronomous and autonomous ethics, it is proposed that ultimately and beyond informed consent and training courses on research ethics, the behavior of the researcher will depend on his/her own moral responsibility, tested in different situational contexts. Two explanatory models are used in order to understand this dynamic, the one of normality in mental health and the one of moral development of men. We conclude that the research process in human beings is a scientific and moral activity that, depending in various situations of conflicts of interest, will always test the researcher’s moral controls.

Se realizó un estudio observacional con el objetivo de describir la presencia de plagio en tesis de medicina ejecutadas en el año 2008 en una universidad pública peruana. Se buscó plagio en las introducciones de 33 tesis usando un algoritmo de búsqueda con Google, se caracterizó el tipo de estudio y se buscó en forma electrónica si los asesores de las tesis han publicado artículos en revistas científicas. Se encontró evidencia de plagio en 27/33 de las introducciones, 37,3% (171/479) de todos los párrafos analizados tuvieron algún grado de plagio, el plagio literal fue el más frecuente (20/27) y las fuentes de plagio más comunes fueron revistas científicas (19/27). Las características de los estudios analizados fueron observacionales (32/33), transversales (30/33), descriptivos (25/33) y retrospectivos (19/33). Ninguno de los autores había publicado en una revista científica, y sólo nueve de sus asesores de ellos tenían al menos una publicación. No se encontró asociación entre las características de la tesis y la presencia de plagio. En conclusión, se encontró una alta frecuencia de plagio en las tesis analizadas. Es responsabilidad de las facultades de medicina tomar las medidas necesarias para detectar y evitar el plagio entre sus estudiantes.An observational study was conducted to describe the presence of plagiarism in medical thesis in 2008 performed at a public university in Peru. Search for plagiarism in 33 thesis introductions using a Google search algorithm, characterizes of the study type and we search in electronic form if the thesis mentor have published articles in scientific journals. We found evidence of plagiarism in 27/33 introductions, 37.3% (171/479) of all the paragraphs analyzed had some degree of plagiarism, literal plagiarism was the most frequent (20/27) and journals were the most common sources of plagiarism (19/27). The characteristics of the studies were observational (32/33), cross-sectional (30/33), descriptive (25/33) and retrospective (19/33). None of the authors had published in a scientific journal, and only nine of his tutors of them had at least one publication. No association was found between the characteristics of the thesis and the presence of plagiarism. In conclusion, we found a high frequency of plagiarism in theses analyzed. Is responsibility of medical schools take the necessary actions to detect and avoid plagiarism among their students.

Introducción: El fraude académico es una práctica deshonesta muy frecuente, difundida en el ambiente universitario, en el que se encuentran afectados los valores y el sentido de responsabilidad con la academia y su formación profesional, el cual se verá reflejado en una posible mal praxis. Objetivos: Identificar las situaciones personales que hacen a los estudiantes propensos a cometer fraude académico y establecer si tienen conocimiento sobre las consecuencias que puede traer para su calidad como profesional. Materiales y métodos: Se efectuó un estudio descriptivo de enfoque cualitativo. El muestreo utilizado fue en avalancha, que consiste en pedirles a los participantes que sugirieran otros posibles informantes, a los cuales se realizó entrevistas individuales en profundidad, entrevistas estructuradas y entrevistas a grupos focales. Posteriormente se realizó el análisis de los resultados a partir de triangulación de datos. Resultados: El fraude académico afecta comúnmente a la población estudiantil que es propensa a problemas familiares y personales, lo que los hace incurrir en esta opción como la única alternativa para lograr los objetivos académicos, al encontrar que no existe aparente solución ante sus problemas personales y familiares, confrontados a la situación académica. Conclusión: Los estudiantes que cometen acciones fraudulentas justifican sus actos al explicar los principales motivos resaltando la importancia de la familia y de su entorno social, a la vez aceptan que esto afecta su calidad como profesional, pero aun así lo siguen realizando, porque el único objetivo es aprobar la asignatura o el semestre.

Copyright of Revista Bioetica is the property of Conselho Federal de Medicina and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Revista Bioetica is the property of Conselho Federal de Medicina and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

El presente artículo pretende hacer claridad sobre la definición de plagio y de conceptos que le son afines, haciendo énfasis en las implicaciones jurídicas y legales que conlleva. Los médicos, y especialmente los cirujanos, desconocemos al investigar, escribir e intentar publicar, las implicaciones que tiene desconocer aspectos éticos y legales del plagio. El desconocimiento de la ley no exime de responsabilidades legales ni de una sanción. Sin perder de vista los antecedentes históricos, doctrinales, jurisprudenciales, éticos y morales, finaliza con reflexiones respecto al control, y a la importancia que ello tiene para las instituciones de educación superior del país y para los autores de artículos científicos.

La publicación de un artículo científico permite al investigador transmitir sus ideas dando a conocer los resultados de su investigación, condicionando que sus hallazgos sean probados y replicados por sus colegas. Con frecuencia, la cantidad de publicaciones es usada como medición del rendimiento científico y la calidad de la misma, se evalúa también dependiendo de la revista en la cual aparece. Sin embargo, existen una serie de irregularidades en la publicación de un artículo científico, como son los aspectos relacionados a la autoría, manejo de los datos, duplicación o falsedad de las publicaciones y conflictos de interés.

In recent years, many cases of scientific misconduct have come to light, some with considerable consequences, highlighting the existing breaches in the scientific integrity globally. In Spain, there have also been high-profile cases of scientific misconduct. However, so far, no organism or agency has been created to monitor the execution, analysis and publication phases of biomedical research from an ethical point of view. Therefore, in this context, we consider that there is a need for the creation of an office which supervises research integrity in Spain which would act in cases of suspected scientific misconduct, carrying out an independent investigation and proposing public sanctions. The existence of such an organism would be of particular importance in the case of publicly funded research, since in that case research fraud would involve the misappropriation of public funds. The creation of an office that would act on detected cases could have a deterrent effect on potential misconduct by some researchers, thus preventing cases of scientific misconduct., (Copyright © 2022 SESPAS. Publicado por Elsevier España, S.L.U. All rights reserved.)

An observational study was conducted to describe the presence of plagiarism in medical thesis in 2008 performed at a public university in Peru. Search for plagiarism in 33 thesis introductions using a Google search algorithm, characterizes of the study type and we search in electronic form if the thesis mentor have published articles in scientific journals. We found evidence of plagiarism in 27/33 introductions, 37.3% (171/479) of all the paragraphs analyzed had some degree of plagiarism, literal plagiarism was the most frequent (20/27) and journals were the most common sources of plagiarism (19/27). The characteristics of the studies were observational (32/33), cross-sectional (30/33), descriptive (25/33) and retrospective (19/33). None of the authors had published in a scientific journal, and only nine of his tutors of them had at least one publication. No association was found between the characteristics of the thesis and the presence of plagiarism. In conclusion, we found a high frequency of plagiarism in theses analyzed. Is responsibility of medical schools take the necessary actions to detect and avoid plagiarism among their students. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Salud Uninorte is the property of Fundacion Universidad del Norte and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)