Order:
  1.  51
    Analysis of Citations to Biomedical Articles Affected by Scientific Misconduct.Anne Victoria Neale, Rhonda K. Dailey & Judith Abrams - 2010 - Science and Engineering Ethics 16 (2):251-261.
    We describe the ongoing citations to biomedical articles affected by scientific misconduct, and characterize the papers that cite these affected articles. The citations to 102 articles named in official findings of scientific misconduct during the period of 1993 and 2001 were identified through the Institute for Scientific Information Web of Science database. Using a stratified random sampling strategy, we performed a content analysis of 603 of the 5,393 citing papers to identify indications of awareness that the cited articles affected by (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  2.  23
    Correction and Use of Biomedical Literature Affected by Scientific Misconduct.Anne Victoria Neale, Justin Northrup, Rhonda Dailey, Ellen Marks & Judith Abrams - 2007 - Science and Engineering Ethics 13 (1):5-24.
    The purpose of this study was to identify and describe published research articles that were named in official findings of scientific misconduct and to investigate compliance with the administrative actions contained in these reports for corrections and retractions, as represented in PubMed. Between 1993 and 2001, 102 articles were named in either the NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts (“Findings of Scientific Misconduct”) or the U.S. Office of Research Integrity annual reports as needing retraction or correction. In 2002, 98 of (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  3.  41
    Medical Journals' Conflicts of Interest in the Publication of Book Reviews.Ronald M. Davis, Anne Victoria Neale & Joseph C. Monsur - 2003 - Science and Engineering Ethics 9 (4):471-483.
    The purpose of the study was to assess medical journals’ conflicts of interest in the publication of book reviews. We examined book reviews published in 1999, 2000, and 2001 in five leading medical journals: Annals of Internal Medicine, British Medical Journal, Journal of the American Medical Association, Lancet, and New England Journal of Medicine. The main outcome measure was journal publication of reviews of books that had been published by the journal’s own publisher, that had been edited or authored by (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark