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 15 March 2007 Volume 2007:3(1) Pages 39—53

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:

Malignant glomus tumor of the lung with multiorgan metastases: case report and literature review

Dong LL, Chen EG, Sheikh IS, Jiang ZN, Huang AH, Ying KJ

OncoTargets and Therapy 2015, 8:1909-1914

Published Date: 28 July 2015

Investigation of brain tumors using 18F-fluorobutyl ethacrynic amide and its metabolite with positron emission tomography

Huang YC, Huang HL, Yeh CN, Lin KJ, Yu CS

OncoTargets and Therapy 2015, 8:1877-1885

Published Date: 24 July 2015

Micropulse diode laser trabeculoplasty in Nigerian patients

Babalola OE

Clinical Ophthalmology 2015, 9:1347-1351

Published Date: 20 July 2015

Major depressive disorder: mechanism-based prescribing for personalized medicine

Saltiel PF, Silvershein DI

Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment 2015, 11:875-888

Published Date: 31 March 2015

Dynamic hyperinflation and dyspnea during the 6-minute walk test in stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients

Satake M, Shioya T, Uemura S, Takahashi H, Sugawara K, Kasai C, Kiyokawa N, Watanabe T, Sato S, Kawagoshi A

International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease 2015, 10:153-158

Published Date: 17 January 2015

Perioperative use of statins in noncardiac surgery

YC Chan, SW Cheng, MG Irwin

Vascular Health and Risk Management 2008, 4:75-81

Published Date: 8 February 2008