A survey of newly appointed consultants' attitudes towards research fraud

J Med Ethics. 2001 Oct;27(5):344-6. doi: 10.1136/jme.27.5.344.

Abstract

Objective: To determine the prevalence of, and attitudes towards, observed and personal research misconduct among newly appointed medical consultants.

Design: Questionnaire study.

Setting: Mersey region, United Kingdom.

Participants: Medical consultants appointed between Jan 1995 and Jan 2000 in seven different hospital trusts (from lists provided by each hospital's personnel department).

Main outcome measures: Reported observed misconduct, reported past personal misconduct and reported possible future misconduct.

Results: One hundred and ninety-four replies were received (a response rate of 63.6%); 55.7% of respondents had observed some form of research misconduct; 5.7% of respondents admitted to past personal misconduct; 18% of respondents were either willing to commit or unsure about possible future research misconduct. Only 17% of the respondents reported having received any training in research ethics. Anaesthetists reported a lower incidence of observed research misconduct (33.3%) than the rest of the respondents (61.5%) (p<0.05).

Conclusion: There is a higher prevalence of observed and possible future misconduct among newly appointed consultants in the UK than in the comparable study of biomedical trainees in California. Although there is a need for more extensive studies, this survey suggests that there is a real and potential problem of research misconduct in the UK.

Publication types

  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

  • Attitude of Health Personnel*
  • Humans
  • Medical Staff, Hospital / psychology*
  • Medicine / statistics & numerical data
  • Scientific Misconduct*
  • Specialization
  • Surveys and Questionnaires
  • United Kingdom