The Cultural Context of Plagiarism and Research Misconduct in the Asian Region.

Plagiarism is one of the most frequent forms of research misconduct in South and East Asian countries. This narrative review examines the factors contributing to research misconduct, emphasizing plagiarism, particularly in South, East and Southeast Asian countries. We conducted a PubMed and Scopus search using the terms plagiarism, Asia, South Asia, East Asia, Southeast Asia, research misconduct and retractions in January of 2022. Articles with missing abstracts, incomplete information about plagiarism, publication dates before 2010, and those unrelated to South, East, and Southeast Asian countries were excluded. The retraction watch database was searched for articles retracted between 9th January 2020 to 9th January 2022. A total of 159 articles were identified, of which 21 were included in the study using the database search criteria mentioned above. The review of articles identified a lack of training in scientific writing and research ethics, publication pressure, permissive attitudes, and inadequate regulatory measures as the primary reasons behind research misconduct in scientific publications. Plagiarism remains a common cause of unethical publications and retractions in regions of Asia (namely South, East and Southeast). Researchers lack training in scientific writing, and substantial gaps exist in understanding various forms of plagiarism, which heavily contribute to the problem. There is an urgent need to foster high research ethics standards and adhere to journal policies. Providing appropriate training in scientific writing among researchers may help improve the knowledge of different types of plagiarism and promote the use of antiplagiarism software, leading to a substantial reduction in the problem.

Gender differences in first authorship of randomized controlled trials from India.

BACKGROUND: It has been established that identity of the trial leadership plays a role in the conduct of the trial. An estimation of the gender composition of RCT leadership in India has not been undertaken. We performed this study to quantify the gender composition of first authors of RCTs published from India for the years 2011 to 2020. METHODS: PubMed database was searched using the keyword "randomized controlled trial". We included studies that were classified as a RCT, had a first author affiliation that belonged to India and were published online between 1st January 2011 to 31st December 2020. The gender of the first authors was determined using Gender-API and manually. RESULTS: Out of the total 4136 RCTs included in our study, the gender of 4056 (98%) first authors were identified. Of the 4056 first authors, 1198 (30%) were women and 2858 (70%) were men. The mean (SD) percentage of yearly distribution of women and men as first authors was 29.53(2.23) and 70.46(2.23), respectively. We did not find any significant change in gender distribution of first authors over the course of ten years [P = 0.78]. CONCLUSION: The persistence of gender disparity in the leadership of RCTs from India demands greater efforts towards inclusion of women as leaders of clinical trials.