Fraud in Medical Research: An International Survey of Biostatisticians
Introduction
The public awareness of scientific fraud has increased remarkably since the late 1980s when a controversy made front-page news, instead a paper investigated for fraud had as coauthor a Nobel laureate [1]. During the 1990s scientific fraud was disclosed on numerous occasions [2]. In fact, it was recently suggested that fraud now is “endemic in many scientific disciplines and in most countries” [3]. However, the clandestine character and consequential lack of reliable information make it difficult to study scientific fraud. The characteristics and frequency of scientific fraud, therefore, are generally unknown, and its impact on medical research is unclear.
Biostatisticians routinely work closely with physicians and scientists in many branches of medical research and have unique insight into data. In addition, they have the methodological competence to detect fraud and could be expected to have a special professional interest in the validity of results. Biostatisticians therefore could provide unique and reliable information on the characteristics of fraud in medical research.
The objective of this study was to assess the characteristics of fraud in medical research by surveying members of the International Society of Clinical Biostatistics (ISCB).
Section snippets
Material and methods
The ISCB is an international society for biostatisticians, which, in April 1998, had 442 members in 31 countries on six continents. Most of the members (69%) were from the European Union, of whom 80 lived in the United Kingdom, 54 in Germany, and 39 in Sweden. Forty-three members lived in the United States. Eighteen countries had fewer than ten members each (Table 1). The ISCB has a subcommittee on fraud, which was set up following the expression of concerns both about fraud and inappropriate
Results
One hundred sixty-three members and three nonmembers completed questionnaires. We report here information from the 163 members who responded. The response rate for members was 37% (see Table 1). Several responders expressed their concern about anonymity (nationality, age, and sex could identify them). Eleven members also declined to disclose their nationality. Most responders mailed or faxed their questionnaires to the survey office; only 23 (14%) used the Web.
Table 2 shows the distribution of
Discussion
This survey of biostatisticians found that knowledge of fraudulent projects is surprisingly common. Although only 163 of the 442 members (37%) responded to the survey, 81 (51%) reported that they knew of at least one fraudulent project in their proximity in the past 10 years. Even if these 81 responses included all episodes of fraud known to the 442 ISCB members, the prevalence estimate of ISCB members knowing of fraudulent projects in their vicinity in the past 10 years would be 18%. Although
Acknowledgements
The International Society for Clinical Biostatistics (ISCB) covered costs for printing and mailing of the questionnaires of this survey. The full results of the study were presented at the ISCB meeting at Dundee, Scotland, UK, August 24–28, 1998, and are available from the first author. The views expressed in this paper are those of the authors, not necessarily of the organizations with which the authors are affiliated.
References (9)
- US Committee on Energy and Commerce. Scientific fraud and misconduct in the National Institutes of Health biomedical...
Research misconductA résumé of recent events
- Fulford P. Fraud and plagiarism. In: Williamson A, White C, eds. Committee on Publication Ethics. The COPE Report 1998....
In the trenches doubts about scientific integrity
Science
(1994)