Article type
Year
Abstract
Background: In low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) research integrity is increasingly important as researchers take the stage in international research, global standards are rising and systems for assuring integrity may be limited. To promote integrity in reporting research, we need to understand the current situation in terms of what LMIC researchers think and what is happening at institutions.
Objectives: To describe LMIC health researchers’ perceptions and awareness of good practice in relation to authorship, redundant publication, plagiarism and conflict of interest.
Methods: We conducted an online survey of LMIC contact authors of active Cochrane Reviews in 2015. We developed and piloted a questionnaire containing scenarios related to authorship, redundant publication, plagiarism and conflict of interest. We included opportunities for free-text comments. We set up the survey on Google and invited participants via email. We analysed data with SPSS. Ethical approval was obtained and responses were anonymous.
Results: We received 199/583 (34%) responses from Latin America, Africa and Asia. Respondents were authors on a median of 3 Cochrane reviews (IQR 1-5). Most respondents thought that adding (65%; 129/198) or omitting (98%; 195/198) an author, text-recycling (71%; 141/198), translating a text (95%; 189/198) or copying an idea (90%; 178/198) without acknowledgement of the source, and not declaring a financial (87%; 173/198) or non-financial conflict of interest (76%; 151/198) was unacceptable. However respondents indicated that these practices did occur at their institutions. Guest authorship was the most common practice and 77% of respondents stated it occurred in their institution. Respondents also commented extensively, especially on authorship issues, which appeared to be a common problem. Comprehensive results will be presented at the Colloquium.
Conclusions: Although LMIC researchers perceived certain reporting practices to be unacceptable, they also indicated that these occurred at their institutions. Follow-up interviews with selected participants who provided contact details will explore these issues in depth to inform future activities.
Objectives: To describe LMIC health researchers’ perceptions and awareness of good practice in relation to authorship, redundant publication, plagiarism and conflict of interest.
Methods: We conducted an online survey of LMIC contact authors of active Cochrane Reviews in 2015. We developed and piloted a questionnaire containing scenarios related to authorship, redundant publication, plagiarism and conflict of interest. We included opportunities for free-text comments. We set up the survey on Google and invited participants via email. We analysed data with SPSS. Ethical approval was obtained and responses were anonymous.
Results: We received 199/583 (34%) responses from Latin America, Africa and Asia. Respondents were authors on a median of 3 Cochrane reviews (IQR 1-5). Most respondents thought that adding (65%; 129/198) or omitting (98%; 195/198) an author, text-recycling (71%; 141/198), translating a text (95%; 189/198) or copying an idea (90%; 178/198) without acknowledgement of the source, and not declaring a financial (87%; 173/198) or non-financial conflict of interest (76%; 151/198) was unacceptable. However respondents indicated that these practices did occur at their institutions. Guest authorship was the most common practice and 77% of respondents stated it occurred in their institution. Respondents also commented extensively, especially on authorship issues, which appeared to be a common problem. Comprehensive results will be presented at the Colloquium.
Conclusions: Although LMIC researchers perceived certain reporting practices to be unacceptable, they also indicated that these occurred at their institutions. Follow-up interviews with selected participants who provided contact details will explore these issues in depth to inform future activities.