Back to Browse Journals » Vascular Health and Risk Management » Volume 3 » Issue 1

What is the future of peer review? Why is there fraud in science? Is plagiarism out of control? Why do scientists do bad things? Is it all a case of: “All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing?”

Authors Chris R Triggle, David J Triggle

Published Date May 2007 Volume 2007:3(1) Pages 39—53

DOI

Published 18 May 2007

Chris R Triggle1, David J Triggle2

1School of Medical Sciences, RMIT University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia; 2School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, State University of New York at Buffalo, Buffalo NY, USA

Abstract: Peer review is an essential component of the process that is universally applied prior to the acceptance of a manuscript, grant or other scholarly work. Most of us willingly accept the responsibilities that come with being a reviewer but how comfortable are we with the process? Peer review is open to abuse but how should it be policed and can it be improved? A bad peer review process can inadvertently ruin an individual’s career, but are there penalties for policing a reviewer who deliberately sabotages a manuscript or grant? Science has received an increasingly tainted name because of recent high profile cases of alleged scientific misconduct. Once considered the results of work stress or a temporary mental health problem, scientific misconduct is increasingly being reported and proved to be a repeat offence. How should scientific misconduct be handled—is it a criminal offence and subject to national or international law? Similarly plagiarism is an ever-increasing concern whether at the level of the student or a university president. Are the existing laws tough enough? These issues, with appropriate examples, are dealt with in this review.

Keywords: peer review, journal impact factors, conflicts of interest, scientific misconduct, plagiarism

Download Article [PDF] 

Readers of this article also read:

Tubeimoside-1 induces glioma apoptosis through regulation of Bax/Bcl-2 and the ROS/Cytochrome C/Caspase-3 pathway

Jia G, Wang Q, Wang R, Deng D, Xue L, Shao N, Zhang Y, Xia X, Zhi F, Yang Y

OncoTargets and Therapy 2015, 8:303-311

Published Date: 30 January 2015

In situ precipitation: a novel approach for preparation of iron-oxide magnetoliposomes

Xia S, Li P, Chen Q, Armah M, Ying X, Wu J, Lai J

International Journal of Nanomedicine 2014, 9:2607-2617

Published Date: 23 May 2014

The epidemiology of irritable bowel syndrome

Canavan C, West J, Card T

Clinical Epidemiology 2014, 6:71-80

Published Date: 4 February 2014

Reduced reward-related probability learning in schizophrenia patients

Yılmaz A, Simsek F, Gonul AS

Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment 2012, 8:27-34

Published Date: 5 January 2012

Addition of a fixed combination of brinzolamide 1%/timolol 0.5% to prostaglandin monotherapy in patients with glaucoma or ocular hypertension

Lorenz K, Rosbach K, Matt A, Pfeiffer N

Clinical Ophthalmology 2011, 5:1745-1750

Published Date: 9 December 2011

Migraine with benign episodic unilateral mydriasis

Skeik N, Jabr FI

International Journal of General Medicine 2011, 4:501-503

Published Date: 30 June 2011

Delayed-onset bleb-associated endophthalmitis: presentation and outcome by culture result

Jacobs DJ, Leng T, Flynn HW Jr, Shi W, Miller D, Gedde SJ

Clinical Ophthalmology 2011, 5:739-744

Published Date: 2 June 2011

Clinical profile of hypertension at a University Teaching Hospital in Nigeria

Arthur C Onwuchekwa, Sunday Chinenye

Vascular Health and Risk Management 2010, 6:511-516

Published Date: 1 July 2010

Safety and efficacy of nateglinide/metformin combination therapy in the treatment of type 2 diabetes

Marc K Israel, Eva Istvan, Michelle A Baron

Vascular Health and Risk Management 2008, 4:1167-1178

Published Date: 2 September 2008

Ximelagatran: direct thrombin inhibitor

Shir-Jing Ho, Tim A Brighton

Vascular Health and Risk Management 2006, 2:49-58

Published Date: 25 January 2006