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:

Prognostic significance of ASXL1, JAK2V617F mutations and JAK2V617F allele burden in Philadelphia-negative myeloproliferative neoplasms

Yonal-Hindilerden I, Daglar-Aday A, Akadam-Teker B, Yilmaz C, Nalcaci M, Yavuz AS, Sargin D

Journal of Blood Medicine 2015, 6:157-175

Published Date: 1 June 2015

Patient preference and ease of use for different coagulation factor VIII reconstitution device scenarios: a cross-sectional survey in five European countries

Cimino E, Linari S, Malerba M, Halimeh S, Biondo F, Westfeld M

Patient Preference and Adherence 2014, 8:1713-1720

Published Date: 12 December 2014

Near-infrared spectroscopy and plasma homovanillic acid levels in bipolar disorder: a case report

Miura I, Kono S, Oshima S, Kanno-Nozaki K, Mashiko H, Niwa SI, Yabe H

Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment 2014, 10:507-511

Published Date: 25 March 2014

Particle size reduction to the nanometer range: a promising approach to improve buccal absorption of poorly water-soluble drugs

Rao S, Song Y, Peddie F, Evans AM

International Journal of Nanomedicine 2011, 6:1245-1251

Published Date: 20 June 2011

Crystallization after intravitreal ganciclovir injection

Pitipol Choopong, Nattaporn Tesavibul, Nattawut Rodanant

Clinical Ophthalmology 2010, 4:709-711

Published Date: 14 July 2010

Treatment of lumbar disc herniation: Evidence-based practice

Andrew J Schoenfeld, Bradley K Weiner

International Journal of General Medicine 2010, 3:209-214

Published Date: 9 July 2010

Role of aliskiren in cardio-renal protection and use in hypertensives with multiple risk factors

Eduardo Pimenta, Suzanne Oparil

Vascular Health and Risk Management 2009, 5:453-463

Published Date: 19 May 2009