DealingwithRESEARCHMISCONDUCT.pptVIP

VLH Dealing with RESEARCH MISCONDUCT THE DANISH MODEL: ORIGIN THE DANISH MODEL: FOUNDATION THE DANISH MODEL: PRUNING Scientific dishonesty as defined by SOME MAIN CHANGESComparing regulations HOW THE COMMITTEES WORK HOW THE COMMITTEES WORK Further remarks VLH A state has laws for regulating the behaviour of its inhabitants in order to prevent undesired actions. In the same spirit, it is necessary to agree on basic rules for good conduct in the sciences and to establish a legal system to handle scientific misconduct – breaking the rules – when it occurs. Vagn Lundsgaard Hansen The Danish Committees on Scientific Dishonesty In 1992, the Danish Medical Research Council established an agency, the Danish Committee on Scientific Dishonesty (DCSD), to deal with scientific misconduct in the health sciences. The term ‘Scientific Dishonesty’ was chosen to reflect that the committee should not only consider cases of direct fraud but also less clear-cut cases of improper research behaviour. As a special thing, researchers could by themselves ask for an investigation of named, anonymous or source-protected allegations of scientific dishonesty in order to be cleared of unfounded accusations. The Baltimore case in the United States showed that it is hard to unravel fraud in the sciences without proper means. The case began in 1986 and was concluded in 1996. The committee had 7 researchers from the health sciences as members and 7 alternates. Chaired by a High Court Judge. From 1 January 1999 the three Committees on Scientific Dishonesty acted under “Danish Executive Order No. 933 of 15 December 1998”. The committees got a joint secretariat in the Danish Research Agency and were chaired by a joint chairman – a High Court Judge. Each committee was composed of 4 researchers as members and 4 alternates. The agency for handling misconduct in the health sciences was a success and in 1998, the Danish Research Councils established three committees, called the