Article info
PDFCommentary
Responding to unethical research: the importance of transparency
- Correspondence to Professor Wendy A Rogers, Philosophy and Medicine, Macquarie University, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia; wendy.rogers{at}mq.edu.au
Citation
Responding to unethical research: the importance of transparency
Publication history
- Received September 5, 2020
- Accepted September 5, 2020
- First published September 14, 2020.
Online issue publication
September 23, 2020
Article Versions
- Previous version (23 September 2020).
- You are viewing the most recent version of this article.
Request permissions
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
Copyright information
© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.
Other content recommended for you
- Against the use and publication of contemporary unethical research: the case of Chinese transplant research
- Is it unethical to publish data from Chinese transplant research?
- Compliance with ethical standards in the reporting of donor sources and ethics review in peer-reviewed publications involving organ transplantation in China: a scoping review
- Why unethical papers should be retracted
- Population-based survey methods to quantify associations between human rights violations and health outcomes among internally displaced persons in eastern Burma
- An analysis of tax abuse, debt, and climate change risk in low-income and lower-middle-income countries
- Smoke and mirrors: unanswered questions and misleading statements obscure the truth about organ sources in China
- New BMA book highlights human rights abuses
- Ethics briefings
- Engaging with China on organ transplantation