Estrategias para inhibir y prevenir el fraude en la investigación científica.

  • Omar França Tarragó Universidad Católica de Uruguay
Palabras clave: Investigación científica, fraude investigativo, malas conductas, ética investigativa

Resumen

En este artículo se expone la preocupación creciente de la comunidad científica en relación con las malas conductas en investigación científica; así mismo, se caracterizan someramente los principales tipos de fraude investigativo y se proponen algunas medidas de prevención y de control de las inconductas científicas que podrían ser implementadas por los países, las universidades e institutos de investigación.

Biografía del autor/a

Omar França Tarragó, Universidad Católica de Uruguay
Licenciado en Ética Teológica y doctor en Medicina. Director área de éticas Aplicadas. Profesor de Bioética de la Universidad Católica de Uruguay.

Descargas

Los datos de descargas todavía no están disponibles.

Disciplinas:

Bioética, humanidades, ciencias sociales

Lenguajes:

es

Biografía del autor/a

Omar França Tarragó, Universidad Católica de Uruguay
Licenciado en Ética Teológica y doctor en Medicina. Director área de éticas Aplicadas. Profesor de Bioética de la Universidad Católica de Uruguay.

Referencias bibliográficas

•Anonymous (2011). Aumento do plágio em produções científicas preocupa pesquisadores em todo o mundo. O Estado de S. Paulo. Recuperado de http://saude.estadao.com.br/noticias/geral,aumento-do-plagio-em-producoes-cientificas-preocupa-pesquisadores-em-todo-o-mundo,692874

•Bosch, X. (2007). Dealing with scientific misconduct Europe needs policies for good scientific practice and for investigating misconduct allegations British Medical Journal, 335(115), 524-525.

•Bravo Toledo, R. (s.f.). Aspectos éticos en las publicaciones científicas. Recuperado de http://www.infodoctor.org/rafabravo/fraude.htm

•Bunge, M. (2000). El fraude científico. La Nación. Recuperado de http://www.lanacion.com.ar/38036-el-fraude-cientifico

•Christie, B. (2007). New Helpline for Those Who Blow Whistle on Research Fraud.British Medical Journal, 334(7602), 1023.

•Di Trocchio, F. (2013). Las mentiras de la ciencia. Madrid: Alianza. Dworkin, T.M. y Baucus, M.S. (1998). Internal vs. external whistleblowers: A comparison of whistleblowering processes. Journal of Business Ethics, 17, 1281-1298.

•European Science Foundation (ESF) y All European Academies (Allea) (2011). The European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity. Strasburgo. Recuperado de www.allea.org

•Fang, F.; Steen, R.G. y Casadevall, A. (2012). Misconduct accounts for the majority of retracted scientific publications. Proceedings of the National Academic of Sciences, 109(42).

•Fernández Muerza, A. (2005). Fraude en la ciencia. Recuperado de http://www.consumer.es/web/es/salud/atencion_sanitaria/2005/08/17/144554.php

•Franca, O. (2011). Ética empresarial y laboral. Los fundamentos y su aplicación. Montevideo: Editorial Magro.

•Freeland, H. (2004). The great betrayal. Fraud in science. Orlando: Harcourt Books.

•García, R. (2008). USP condena físicos acusados de plágio. Folha de S. Paulo. Recuperado de http://www.folha.uol.com.br/folha/ciencia/ult306u448257

•García, R. (2009). Periódico científico publica dois estudos plagiados na íntegra. Folha de S. Paulo. Recuperado de http://www1.folha.uol.com.br/folha/ ciencia/ult306u561841.shtml

•Jubb, P.B., (1999). Whistleblowing: a restrictive definition and interpretation. Journal of Business Ethics, 21,77-94.

•Naciones Unidas (2004). Convención contra la Corrupción. Recuperado de http://www.unodc.org/pdf/crime/convention_corruption/signing/Convention-s.pdf

•Office of Research Integrity (1995). Guidelines for Institutions and Complainants: Responding to Possible Retaliation Against Complainants in Extramural Research. Recuperado de http://ori.dhhs.gov/misconduct/Guidelines_whistleblower.shtml.

•Office of Research Integrity (1998). Scientific Misconduct Investigations 1993-1997. office of Public Health and Science. Department of Health and Human Services. Recuperado de http://ori.hhs.gov/images/ddblock/misconduct_investigations_1993_1997.pdf

•Office of Research Integrity (1997). Model Policy for Responding to Allegations of Scientific Misconduct. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services National Institute of Health and Human Services. Office of Public Health and Science. Recuperado de http://www.onlineethics.org/cms/4629.aspx.

•Pascal, C. B. (2012). Complainant Issues in Research Misconduct. Institute of Health. The office of Research Integrity. Recuperado de http://ori.hhs. gov/sites/default/files/Complainantarticle-Pascal-8-06.pdf

•Rhoades, L. (2000). Final Report Analysis of Institutional Policies For Responding To Allegations of Scientific Misconduct. Rockville (Maryland). Department of Health and Human Services. office of Research Integrity. Recuperado de http://ori.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/institutional_policies.pdf

•Rhoades, L.J., (2004). ORI Closed Investigations into Misconduct Allegations Involving Research Supported by the Public Health Service: 1994-2003. Department of Health and Human Services. office of Public Health and Science. office of Research Integrity. Recuperado de https://ori.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/Investigations1994-2003-2.pdf

•Rhodes, R. y Strain, J.J. (2004). The Olivieri symposium. Whistleblowing in academic medicine. Journal of Medical Ethics, 30(1), 35-39.

•Schafer, A. (2004). Biomedical conflicts of interest: a defence of the sequestration thesis. learning from the cases of Nancy Olivieri and David Healy. Journal of Medical Ethics, 30, 8-24.

•Schulz, P.C. y Katime, I. (2003). Los fraudes científicos. Revista Iberoamericana de Polímeros, 4(2), 1-90.

•Steneck, N.H. (1994). Research Universities and Scientific Misconduct History, Policies, and the Future. Journal of Higher Education, 65(3), 310-330. The Danish Committees on Scientific Dishonesty (2009). Guidelines for Good Scientific Practice with special focus on health science natural science technical science. Copenhagen: Danish Agency for Science, Technology and Innovation.

•Ukrio (2009). Code of Practice for Research. Promoting good practice and preventing misconduct. London: United Kingdom Research Integrity office.

•University College London (2008). Ethical Guidelines for Research Recuperado de http://www.ucl.ac.uk/archaeology/research/ethics/ethical_guidelines University of Cambridge (s.f.). Misconduct in research. Recuperado de http://www.admin.cam.ac.uk/offices/research/documents/research/misconduct_in_research.pdf

•University of Edinburgh (2002). Code of Good Practice in Research. Recuperado de http://www.ed.ac.uk/schools-departments/instituteacademic-development/research-roles/research-only-staff/advice/codes/research-code

•University of Glasgow (2007). Code of Good Practice in Research. Recuperado de http://www.gla.ac.uk/media/media_227599_en.pdf University of Manchester (2006). Code of Good Research Conduct Recuperado de http://www.researchsupport.manchester.ac.uk/Governance/J1276_Good_Research.pdf

•University of Oxford (2007). Academic Integrity in Research:Code of Practice and Procedure. Recuperado de http://www.admin.ox.ac.uk/personnel/cops/researchintegrity/

•University of Sheffield (2003). Good Research Practice Standards. Recuperado de http://www.sheffield.ac.uk/ris/other/gov-ethics/grippolicy

•University of Sussex (2000). Code of Practice For Research. Recuperado de https://www.sussex.ac.uk/webteam/gateway/file.php?name=130108-refcodeofpractice-2014-sussex-fc-amends-post-approval-final-publishedpdf.pdf&site=377

•Yamey, G., (2000, January). Editorial. Protecting whistleblowers Employers should respond to the message, not shoot the messenger. British Medical Journal, 320(7227), 70-71.

Cómo citar
França Tarragó, O. (2014). Estrategias para inhibir y prevenir el fraude en la investigación científica. Revista Latinoamericana De Bioética, 14(27-2), 90–99. https://doi.org/10.18359/rlbi.511
Publicado
2014-06-15

Métricas

Crossref Cited-by logo
QR Code