Purpose: The number of retracted papers from Chinese university-affiliated hospitals is increasing, which has raised much concern. The aim of this study is to analyze the retracted papers from university-affiliated ho...Purpose: The number of retracted papers from Chinese university-affiliated hospitals is increasing, which has raised much concern. The aim of this study is to analyze the retracted papers from university-affiliated hospitals in China’s mainland from 2000 to 2021. Design/methodology/approach: Data for 1,031 retracted papers were identified from the Web of Science Core collection database. The information of the hospitals involved was obtained from their official websites. We analyzed the chronological changes, journal distribution, discipline distribution and retraction reasons for the retracted papers. The grade and geographic locations of the hospitals involved were explored as well.Findings: We found a rapid increase in the number of retracted papers, while the retraction time interval is decreasing. The main reasons for retraction are plagiarism/self-plagiarism(n=255), invalid data/images/conclusions(n=212), fake peer review(n=175) and honesty error(n=163). The disciplines are mainly distributed in oncology(n=320), pharmacology & pharmacy(n=198) and research & experimental medicine(n=166). About 43.8% of the retracted papers were from hospitals affiliated with prestigious universities. Research limitations: This study fails to differentiate between retractions due to honest error and retractions due to research misconduct. We believe that there is a fundamental difference between honest error retractions and misconduct retractions. Another limitation is that authors of the retracted papers have not been analyzed in this study.Practical implications: This study provides a reference for addressing research misconduct in Chinese university-affiliated hospitals. It is our recommendation that universities and hospitals should educate all their staff about the basic norms of research integrity, punish authors of scientific misconduct retracted papers, and reform the unreasonable evaluation system.Originality/value: Based on the analysis of retracted papers, this study further analyzes the characteristics of institutions of retracted papers, which may deepen the research on retracted papers and provide a new perspective to understand the retraction phenomenon.展开更多
目的探讨关于护理研究人员科研诚信缺失行为的影响因素及应对策略的相关研究现状。方法采用范围综述的研究方法,系统检索Pub Med、Web of Science核心合集数据库、Embase、CINAHL、Cochrane Library、中国知网、万方数据知识服务平台和...目的探讨关于护理研究人员科研诚信缺失行为的影响因素及应对策略的相关研究现状。方法采用范围综述的研究方法,系统检索Pub Med、Web of Science核心合集数据库、Embase、CINAHL、Cochrane Library、中国知网、万方数据知识服务平台和维普网中的相关研究,检索时限为建库至2024年10月。对纳入文献进行归纳分析。结果共纳入11篇文献,发表时间为2012—2023年,导致护理科研不端行为的影响因素分为内部因素(人口学因素、人格特质、个人因素、利益驱动和对科研不端行为的感知)、人际因素(导师)和外部因素(制度因素、组织环境因素、压力因素),同时针对以上因素提出强化科研综合素质、加强学术道德、培养科研诚信实践榜样、科研活动监督管理制度、科研诚信行为认知和规范教育、缓解科研压力等应对策略。结论科研诚信对于推进知识和开展高水平的科学研究至关重要,未来应该更多关注科研诚信建设,制订有效措施解决护理科研不端行为的发生。展开更多
目的运用文献计量和知识图谱等方法,分析医学领域科研诚信治理相关研究进展,并进行可视化分析。方法检索2004年1月至2024年12月中国知网和Web of Science核心合集数据库中的医学领域科研诚信相关论文,运用Cite Space 5.8.R3c和VOSviewer...目的运用文献计量和知识图谱等方法,分析医学领域科研诚信治理相关研究进展,并进行可视化分析。方法检索2004年1月至2024年12月中国知网和Web of Science核心合集数据库中的医学领域科研诚信相关论文,运用Cite Space 5.8.R3c和VOSviewer 1.6.18软件开展文献计量分析,分析年度发文量趋势、机构、关键词共现网络、关键词聚类和关键词突现等指标。结果最终纳入中文文献209篇、英文文献240篇。中文文献的年发文量和英文文献的年发文量均呈波动上升趋势,美国的发文量最高(99篇);中文数据集中华医学会杂志社发文量最多(5篇),英文数据集欧洲斯普利特大学发文量最高(10篇);关键词共现、聚类、突现分析结果显示中文文献偏向科研诚信的制度落地与本土化政策落地,英文文献则更聚焦于科研不端行为细分研究、技术融合与伦理议题等。结论国内外医学领域科研诚信问题越来越受到关注,我国医学科研诚信治理结构呈现多主体协同的治理模式,期刊出版、人工智能技术在科研诚信治理过程中发挥重要作用。构建开放科学新生态是科研诚信治理的治本之策,我国应积极参与并引领国际科研诚信规则的制订,为世界科研诚信建设贡献中国智慧。展开更多
[目的/意义]旨在分析2013—2023年中国内科医生SCI论文撤回的数量和内容特征,探讨学术不端的预防措施。[方法/过程]通过检索“Web of Science Core Collection”数据库,获得2013年1月1日至2023年12月31日中国内科医生的撤回论文124篇,...[目的/意义]旨在分析2013—2023年中国内科医生SCI论文撤回的数量和内容特征,探讨学术不端的预防措施。[方法/过程]通过检索“Web of Science Core Collection”数据库,获得2013年1月1日至2023年12月31日中国内科医生的撤回论文124篇,根据撤稿观察网站(Retraction Watch)提供的撤稿原因进行统计分析,利用VOSviewer知识图谱软件绘制撤稿原因聚类图和关键词共现网络图。[结果/结论]124篇撤回稿件有118篇标注了撤回原因,共标注了62种原因,累计出现281次。包括文本(48次)、数据(43次)、图片(36次)在内的内容相关问题(共164次),第三方介入(49次)及伦理问题(22次)是文章撤回的主要原因,且第三方介入、数据问题、图片复制原因共现程度更强;撤回稿件主要集中在乙型肝炎病毒、乳腺癌、皮肤、损伤方面的细胞和黏蛋白的表达、增生、凋亡及预后等研究领域。我国应持续完善科研诚信管理制度,积极开发学术不端检测系统,加强我国科研诚信建设,减少学术不端行为。展开更多
基金supported by grants from Humanity and Social Science Youth Foundation of Ministry of Education of China (21YJC870016).
文摘Purpose: The number of retracted papers from Chinese university-affiliated hospitals is increasing, which has raised much concern. The aim of this study is to analyze the retracted papers from university-affiliated hospitals in China’s mainland from 2000 to 2021. Design/methodology/approach: Data for 1,031 retracted papers were identified from the Web of Science Core collection database. The information of the hospitals involved was obtained from their official websites. We analyzed the chronological changes, journal distribution, discipline distribution and retraction reasons for the retracted papers. The grade and geographic locations of the hospitals involved were explored as well.Findings: We found a rapid increase in the number of retracted papers, while the retraction time interval is decreasing. The main reasons for retraction are plagiarism/self-plagiarism(n=255), invalid data/images/conclusions(n=212), fake peer review(n=175) and honesty error(n=163). The disciplines are mainly distributed in oncology(n=320), pharmacology & pharmacy(n=198) and research & experimental medicine(n=166). About 43.8% of the retracted papers were from hospitals affiliated with prestigious universities. Research limitations: This study fails to differentiate between retractions due to honest error and retractions due to research misconduct. We believe that there is a fundamental difference between honest error retractions and misconduct retractions. Another limitation is that authors of the retracted papers have not been analyzed in this study.Practical implications: This study provides a reference for addressing research misconduct in Chinese university-affiliated hospitals. It is our recommendation that universities and hospitals should educate all their staff about the basic norms of research integrity, punish authors of scientific misconduct retracted papers, and reform the unreasonable evaluation system.Originality/value: Based on the analysis of retracted papers, this study further analyzes the characteristics of institutions of retracted papers, which may deepen the research on retracted papers and provide a new perspective to understand the retraction phenomenon.
文摘目的探讨关于护理研究人员科研诚信缺失行为的影响因素及应对策略的相关研究现状。方法采用范围综述的研究方法,系统检索Pub Med、Web of Science核心合集数据库、Embase、CINAHL、Cochrane Library、中国知网、万方数据知识服务平台和维普网中的相关研究,检索时限为建库至2024年10月。对纳入文献进行归纳分析。结果共纳入11篇文献,发表时间为2012—2023年,导致护理科研不端行为的影响因素分为内部因素(人口学因素、人格特质、个人因素、利益驱动和对科研不端行为的感知)、人际因素(导师)和外部因素(制度因素、组织环境因素、压力因素),同时针对以上因素提出强化科研综合素质、加强学术道德、培养科研诚信实践榜样、科研活动监督管理制度、科研诚信行为认知和规范教育、缓解科研压力等应对策略。结论科研诚信对于推进知识和开展高水平的科学研究至关重要,未来应该更多关注科研诚信建设,制订有效措施解决护理科研不端行为的发生。
文摘目的运用文献计量和知识图谱等方法,分析医学领域科研诚信治理相关研究进展,并进行可视化分析。方法检索2004年1月至2024年12月中国知网和Web of Science核心合集数据库中的医学领域科研诚信相关论文,运用Cite Space 5.8.R3c和VOSviewer 1.6.18软件开展文献计量分析,分析年度发文量趋势、机构、关键词共现网络、关键词聚类和关键词突现等指标。结果最终纳入中文文献209篇、英文文献240篇。中文文献的年发文量和英文文献的年发文量均呈波动上升趋势,美国的发文量最高(99篇);中文数据集中华医学会杂志社发文量最多(5篇),英文数据集欧洲斯普利特大学发文量最高(10篇);关键词共现、聚类、突现分析结果显示中文文献偏向科研诚信的制度落地与本土化政策落地,英文文献则更聚焦于科研不端行为细分研究、技术融合与伦理议题等。结论国内外医学领域科研诚信问题越来越受到关注,我国医学科研诚信治理结构呈现多主体协同的治理模式,期刊出版、人工智能技术在科研诚信治理过程中发挥重要作用。构建开放科学新生态是科研诚信治理的治本之策,我国应积极参与并引领国际科研诚信规则的制订,为世界科研诚信建设贡献中国智慧。
