Timing and monitoring of financial disclosures in publications: A cross-institutional assessment of financial conflict of interest reports.

A consistent mitigation strategy used in sponsored research to manage a financial conflict of interest (FCOI) is disclosure in publications. While federal funding regulations require mitigation strategies to be monitored through the end of the project's term, manuscripts are often published after the project term has ended. We examined whether it would be valuable to extend monitoring of publications for compliance with requirements for disclosure beyond the end date of a project's term and, if so, for how long after the term has ended. Using publicly available databases, we identified FCOI reports from public universities and analyzed disclosure completion in the years before and after the end of the project's term. We found that 80.2% of FCOI reports in our sample had a publication in which a conflicted Investigator served as an author, yet less than half (43.6%) of these publications contained disclosure statements acknowledging the known FCOI. We also found that publication most commonly occurred one year after the end of the project's term. These findings indicate that an effective way to support accountability and accuracy of the scientific record would be to extend monitoring of disclosure in publications through one year following the end of the project's term.

A dramatized method for teaching undergraduate students responsible research conduct.

Worldwide, undergraduate science and pre-medical students are encouraged to participate in authentic active learning lab work and undergraduate research experiences. Unfortunately, these experiences rarely include training in science or research ethics. Although several governmental and scientific organizations have called for increased training in responsible research conduct, relatively few studies report on the effectiveness of different pedagogical approaches. Too often science ethics socialization and training is limited to conversations with individual mentors. This paper describes how viewing an interactive theatrical presentation of several research misconduct scenarios was associated with an increase in first-year students' self-assessed understanding of the topics addressed: proper treatment of data images, respect for animal protocols, authorship considerations, and plagiarism issues. There was no decrease in self-reported responsible conduct of research (RCR) knowledge for students surveyed 10 weeks, as compared to 2 weeks, after the science ethics presentations. RCR test question scores showed only a slight decrease in correct answers from 2 to 10 weeks. Theatrical presentation is an inexpensive yet engaging approach that provides students with a chance to actively consider the importance of RCR and the complexities of contexts surrounding ethics decisions before starting a research career.

Reducing tensions and expediting manuscript submission via an authorship agreement for early-career researchers: A pilot study.

Authorship can be a source of tension on research teams, in academic/industry collaborations, and between mentors/mentees. Authorship misconduct is prevalent among biomedical researchers, and disputes about authorship can generate tensions that have the potential to disrupt professional relationships and damage careers. Early-career researchers may experience particular challenges navigating authorship both because of inexperience and power differentials; in effect, they lack the language and confidence to have these conversations and may feel unwilling to challenge the status quo. The authors implemented an Authorship Agreement for use when collaborating on a manuscript and hypothesized that using this agreement would reduce authorship tensions and speed time to manuscript submission by helping early-career investigators manage authorship conversations more effectively. The authors surveyed trainees (n = 65) on the prevalence of authorship-related tensions and compared the results from the first survey in 2017 to the final survey in 2020. The decrease in tensions around meeting deadlines was significant (z = 2.59, p = 0.010). The authors believe the effect of an Authorship Agreement on authorship-related tensions has not previously been investigated. This work extends what is known about the prevalence of commonly cited authorship tensions, and provides evidence of the effectiveness of steps that can be taken to alleviate them.

Chore or desire? Students' response to online lessons in scientific integrity.

One of the main responsibilities of universities for their students, researchers, and society is to teach scientific integrity. Over the years, many universities-including RWTH Aachen University-have developed modules to impart the rules of good scientific practice. The current case study outlines the "Scientific Integrity" online course of RWTH Aachen University that has been offered to all master's students starting in October 2020; it explains to what extent the topic of scientific integrity meets genuine interest among students. Based on the online questionnaires that students were asked to fill out before starting the course (Q1) and after completing the course (Q2), it was verified that the implemented course achieved a satisfactory, but expandable acceptance. 57% of study participants initially (Q1) strongly affirmed to be interested in the topic; said percentage increased to 65.3% at the end of the course (Q2). While at the time of Q1 most students admitted that they would not take the course if it were voluntary, the majority of study participants came to the opposite conclusion after the course (Q2). The results suggest that the assessment of the relevance of the course may be dependent on familiarity with its contents.

The case for affiliation contribution statements.

Author affiliation disclosures are arguably a critical yet poorly understood and largely unregulated phenomenon in scholarly and scientific publishing. First, this paper argues that affiliation attribution practices are burdened by misunderstandings and misuses. Second, it suggests that universities, research institutions and publishers should urgently engage in a conversation aimed at clearly defining expectations and promoting best practices. Third, it introduces affiliation contribution statements as a concrete initiative in the direction of increased accuracy, transparency, and accountability.

Canadian policy on reporting breaches of research integrity: When should Research Ethics Boards be informed?

In Canada, institutions that receive research funding from the three federal granting agencies must establish research ethics boards (REBs) to review the ethical acceptability of research involving humans. Institutions are also expected to promote the responsible conduct of research, fostering researchers' abilities to act with integrity in the conduct of their research. Where a researcher fails to act with integrity in research with humans, institutional policies and procedures of the U15, Canada's most research-intensive universities, vary in the extent to which they involve their REBs in response to such breaches. Some make no mention of the REB, whereas others state that their REB should be provided with information relating to upheld allegations. In this paper, we argue that when allegations of research integrity breaches are corroborated, the institution's REB should be identified as a party required to receive that information. Only then can REBs ensure compliance with research ethics standards, which is essential to maintain the public's trust.

Gestión del conocimiento y capital social: su relación en contextos universitarios / Knowledge management and social capital: their relationship in university contexts

El objetivo de este estudio es sistematizar los elementos teóricos que evidencian el enlace entre la gestión del conocimiento y el capital social en contextos universitarios. Se abordan aspectos teóricos del capital social y la gestión del conocimiento, y específicamente su presencia en contextos universitarios. Se estudian los criterios de importantes exponentes del tema capital social, así como sus elementos identificativos y dimensiones. En el caso de la gestión del conocimiento se hace alusión a estudiosos del tema y sus procesos estratégicos. Se examina la estrecha relación entre capital social, gestión del conocimiento y capital intelectual como una triada que impulsa el desarrollo del conocimiento en las organizaciones. Como resultado se propone una relación entre aquellos aspectos que evidencian el estrecho vínculo entre el capital social y la gestión del conocimiento en las universidades(AU)

The purpose of this study is to systematize the theoretical elements that evidence the link between the management of the knowledge and the social capital in university contexts. Theoretical aspects of social capital and knowledge management are addressed, particularly their presence in university contexts. An analysis was made of criteria of outstanding specialists from the field of social capital, as well as its identifying elements and dimensions. In the case of knowledge management, reference is made to professionals dealing with the topic and its strategic processes. A discussion is provided about the close relationship between social capital, knowledge management and intellectual capital as a triad fostering the development of knowledge in organizations. As a result, a relationship is proposed between aspects which closely link social capital and knowledge management in universities(AU)

Institutional Pathology and the Death of Dan Markingson.

In the spring of 2015, 11 years after a mentally ill young man named Dan Markingson stabbed himself to death in an industry-sponsored drug study, officials at the University of Minnesota suspended recruitment of subjects into drug trials in its Department of Psychiatry. University officials agreed to act only after a scathing investigation by Minnesota Office of the Legislative Auditor found damning evidence of coerced recruitment, inadequate clinical care, superficial research oversight, a web of serious, disturbing conflicts of interest, and a pattern of misleading public statements by university officials aimed at deflecting scrutiny. In this article, I examine the larger institutional factors leading up to Markingson's suicide and prevented corrective action for so long.

Too Many Rationales, Not Enough Reason: A Call to Examine the Goals of Including Lay Members on Institutional Review Boards.

Every major U.S. commission appointed to review Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) as well as numerous reports and scholarly articles have recommended increasing the number of lay (nonscientist and unaffiliated) members on IRBs. Meanwhile, qualitative studies have shown that lay IRB members experience confusion about their roles, including ambiguity whether their roles are different from other members of the board. Without articulating the unique reasons why unaffiliated and nonscientist members are needed, IRBs have little guidance on how to recruit and train these members, and how many should be at the table. By looking back through the history of IRB regulations, policies, and commentaries we can articulate unique contributions these members can make. Only with these contributions in mind can we make arguments for how to best achieve them and make the case that increasing their numbers is necessary.