Intelligence has been defined in many ways the capacity

Ethics In Research Writing
Salam N Asfar

Ethics is principles of conduct
governing an individual or a group.
Research is a must for the progress of science and
a well-written research paper adds to the
knowledge of the society, apart from bringing
honor to its authors.

Ethical behavior
- Research ethics
- Publication ethics
"
First of all, do no harm" Hippocrates

-Research ethics
Declaration of Helsinki
The Declaration of Helsinki is a recognized
statement developed by the World Medical
Association that provides ethical guidelines that
physicians and other medical research
participants should adhere to when conducting
research that uses human subjects.
The Declaration of Helsinki was first adopted in
Helsinki, Finland in June, 1964.

1. Human subject should provide voluntary consent and know the risks
of participation.
2. The experimental results must be for the greater good of society.
3. Experiment should be based on previous animal experimentation.
4. Experiment should avoid unnecessary physical and mental
suffering.
5. No experiments should be conducted if it is believed to cause
disability or death.
6. Benefits must always outweigh the risks.
7. Adequate facilities should be used to protect subjects.
8. Experiment should be conducted only by qualified scientists.
9. Subject should always be at liberty to stop at any time.
10. Scientist in charge must be prepared to terminate the experiment
where injury or death is likely to occur.

- Publication ethics
– avoid misconduct
– protect patients’ identities
– report clearly:
– informed consent
– any deviation from usual practice
– full burden imposed on participants
– total risks posed to participants or others
– benefits to participants, patients, society
• It’s not always enough to state that the study
was approved by an ethical committee

Protect patients’ confidentiality
• Beware identifiers:
age, sex, location,
clinical details, test
results
• unusual personal story
• photo (even if of a
body part or clinical
image)

patients have a right to privacy that should not be violated
without informed consent. Identifying information
including names, initials, or hospital numbers, should not
be published in written description, photographs or
history, unless the information is essential for scientific
purposes and the patient or parents give written
informed consent for publication. Informed consent for
this purpose requires that an identifiable patient be
shown the manuscript to be published. Nonessential
identifying details should be omitted.
Masking the eye region in photographs of patients is
inadequate

Misconduct (Bad behavior)
Fabrication: making up data or results and recording or
reporting them.
Falsification: manipulating research materials, equipment, or
processes, or changing or omitting data or results such that the
research is not accurately represented in the research record.
Presenting unconfirmed facts or data and changing or selecting
certain data to achieve a desired result. Also it is
misrepresenting evidence, facts, or authorship.
Plagiarism: the use of another person's ideas, processes,
results, or words without giving appropriate credit and
attribution.

The honest article
• describe sources of information and methods of
selection
• declare opposing interests
• don’t ignore important data
• don’t ignore important work of others
• If the work is financially supported by some
commercial organization or pharmaceutical
company, the source of funding must be
acknowledged

When presenting results of randomized controlled trials,
authors should indicate clearly how many patients were
screened, randomized, assessed, and included in the
study.
All the citations mentioned in the write up should be stated in
the reference list and they should be checked carefully for
their accuracy in all respects.
The authors must keep in their mind that their statement on
conclusion derived from the study will determine the
treatment of countless number of patients. Therefore, they
should act honestly for the benefit of patients and public at
large, and they should write only the facts which have
emerged from the study.

Rules of good ethics
• Honesty
struggle for honesty in all scientific communications.
Honestly report data, results, methods and procedures.
Do not fabricate, falsify, or misrepresent data. Do not
deceive colleagues, research sponsors, or the public.
• Objectivity
Strive to avoid bias in experimental design, data analysis,
data interpretation, peer review, personnel decisions,
grant writing, expert testimony, and other aspects of
research where objectivity is expected or required. Avoid
or minimize bias or self-deception

• Integrity
Keep your promises and agreements; act with honesty; try
hard for consistency of thought and action.
• Carefulness
Avoid careless errors and negligence; carefully and
critically examine your own work and the work of your
peers. Keep good records of research activities, such as
data collection, research design, and correspondence
with agencies or journals.

• Openness
Share data, results, ideas, tools, resources. Be
open to criticism and new ideas.
• Respect for Academic Property
Honor copyrights, and other forms of intellectual
property. Do not use unpublished data, methods,
or results without permission. Give proper
acknowledgement or credit for all contributions
to research. Never plagiarize.

• Confidentiality
Protect confidential communications, such as
papers or grants submitted for publication,
personnel records, trade or military secrets, and
patient records.
• Responsible Publication
Publish in order to advance research and
scholarship, not to advance just your own
career. Avoid wasteful and duplicative
publication.

• Social Responsibility
Strive to promote social good and prevent or
reduce social harms.
• Non-Discrimination
Avoid discrimination on the basis of sex,
race, ethnicity, or other factors not related
to scientific competence and integrity.

• Animal Care
Show proper respect and care for animals when
using them in research. Do not conduct
unnecessary or poorly designed animal
experiments.
• Human Subjects Protection
When conducting research on human subjects,
minimize harms and risks and maximize
benefits; respect human dignity & privacy.

There are many other activities that the society does not define as
"misconduct" but which are still regarded by most researchers as
unethical.
• Submitting or publishing the same paper in two different journals without
telling the editors
•Including a colleague as an author on a paper in return for a favor even
though the colleague did not make a serious contribution to the paper
•Discussing with your colleagues confidential data from a paper that you
are reviewing for a journal
•Using an inappropriate statistical technique in order to enhance the
significance of your research
•Bypassing the peer review process and announcing your results through
a press conference without giving peers adequate information to review
your work
•Stretching the truth on a grant application in order to convince reviewers
that your project will make a significant contribution to the field
•Giving the same research project to two graduate students in order to see
who can do it the fastest
•Overworking, neglecting, or making use of graduate or post-graduate
students

Ethics workshop
Case 1:
The research protocol for a study of a drug on hypertension
requires the administration of the drug at different doses to
50 laboratory mice, with chemical and behavioral tests to
determine toxic effects. Tom has almost finished the
experiment. He has only 5 mice left to test. However, he
really wants to finish his work in time to go to Florida on
spring break with his friends who are leaving tonight. He
therefore decides to extrapolate or judge from the 45
completed results to produce the 5 additional results.

Case 2:
Dr. T has just discovered a mathematical
error in his paper that has been accepted
for publication in a journal. The error does
not affect the overall results of his
research, but it is potentially misleading.
The journal has just gone to press, so it is
too late to catch the error before it appears
in print. In order to avoid embarrassment,
Dr. T decides to ignore the error.

Case 3:
Dr. Wexford is the principal investigator of a large, epidemiological
study on the health of 10,000 agricultural workers. She has an
impressive dataset that includes information on demographics,
environmental exposures, diet, genetics, and various disease
outcomes such as cancer and Parkinson’s disease (PD). She has just
published a paper on the relationship between pesticide exposure
and PD in a prestigious journal. She is planning to publish many
other papers from her dataset. She receives a request from another
research team that wants access to her complete dataset. They are
interested in examining the relationship between pesticide exposures
and skin cancer. Dr. Wexford was planning to conduct a study on this
topic.
Dr. Wexford faces a difficult choice. On one hand, the ethical norm of
openness obliges her to share data with the other research team. Her
funding agency may also have rules that obligate her to share data.
On the other hand, if she shares data with the other team, they may
publish results that she was planning to publish, thus depriving her
of recognition and priority.

References
1. Flangin A. Human rights in the biomedical literature: The social responsibility
of medical journals. JAMA. 2000;284:618–9. [PubMed]
2. Washington DC: The Department; 1990. US department of Health and Human
Service Office of the Assistant Secretary for Health. First and Final annual
report. Scientific misconduct investigations: Reviewed by the office of
Scientific Integrity Review.
3. International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. Uniform requirements for
manuscript submitted to biomedical journals: Updated October 2008. ICMJE.
[Last accessed on 2011 Dec 23]. web site. Available from: http://www.icmje.org
.
4. Triggle CR, Triggle DJ. What is future of peer review? Why is there fraud in
science? Is plagiarism out of control? Why do scientists do bad things? Is it
all a case of “All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do
nothing”? Vasc Health Risk Manag. 2007;3:39–53. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
5. Thomson DF. Understanding conflict of interest. N Eng J Med. 1993;329:573–6.
[PubMed]
6. Moher D, Schulz KF, Altman DG. The CONSORT statement: Revised
recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel –group
randomised trials. Lancet. 2001;357:1191–4. [PubMed Fundamentals of good
medical writing, Dr. Trish Groves, Deputy editor, BMJ
7. Responsible Conduct of Research, Shamoo A and Resnik 3rd ed. (New York:
Oxford University Press).
8. What is Ethics in Research & Why is it Important? by David B. Resnik, J.D.,
Ph.D

Intelligence has been defined in many ways the capacity

Intelligence has been defined in many ways the capacity

More Related Content

Similar to Intelligence has been defined in many ways the capacity (20)

More from DolffMartinoTurnip (7)

Recently uploaded (20)

Intelligence has been defined in many ways the capacity