home

RCR Casebook: References

Table of Contents | Previous

For Further Reading, see the Introduction to the Casebook for an abbreviated list of resources published by the US Office of Research Integrity, including a textbook, instructional novel, interactive video, and an annotated list of RCR instructional resources.

References for Textboxes

45 CFR 46 part A. (1991). Department of Health and Human Services: Basic Policy for Protection of Human Research Subjects.

45 CFR Parts 50 and 93. (2005). Department of Health and Human Services: Public Health Service Policies on Misconduct; Final Rule.  http://ori.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/42_cfr_parts_50_and_93_2005.pdf Accessed May 9, 2012.

Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals 8th ed. (2011)  Retrieved May 7, 2012, from http://grants.nih.gov/grants/olaw/Guide-for-the-Care-and-Use-of-Laboratory-Animals.pdf

Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC). Website produced by the American Association for Laboratory Animal Science (AALAS)  Retrieved April 16, 2012, from IACUC.org

International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). (2009). Authorship and Publication.  Retrieved March 6, 2012

Katz, D., Caplan, A. L., & Merz, J. F. (2003). All gifts large and small: toward an understanding of the ethics of pharmaceutical industry gift-giving. Am J Bioeth, 3(3), 39-46. doi: 10.1162/15265160360706552

National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research. (1979). The Belmont Report U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. Washington, D.C.

National Institutes of Health. (2012). Writing Your Grant Proposal, from http://grants.nih.gov/grants/writing_application.htm

Office of Research Integrity. (2012). About ORI. http://ori.hhs.gov/about-ori Accessed May 9, 2012.

Russell W, & Birch R. (1959). Principles of Humane Animal Experimentation. Springfield, IL: Charles C.

Shamoo AE, & Resnik DB. (2009). Responsible Conduct of Research (2nd ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.

Steneck NH. (2007). Introduction to the Responsible Conduct of Research.  Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office.

 

References for Introductions

  1. National Institutes of Health. Update on the Requirement for Instruction in the Responsible Conduct of Research In: Health NIo, ed. NOT-OD-10-019. Bethesda, MD: National Institutes of Health; 2009.
     
  2. DuBois JM. Ethics in mental health research: Principles, guidance, and cases. Oxford ; New York: Oxford University Press; 2008.
     
  3. Bulger RE, Heitman E, Reiser SJ. The Ethical Dimensions of the Biological and Health Sciences. 2nd ed. New York: Cambridge University Press; 2002.
     
  4. Mumford MD, Connelly S, Brown RP, et al. A Sensemaking Approach to Ethics Training for Scientists: Preliminary Evidence of Training Effectiveness. Ethics & behavior. Oct 1 2008;18(4):315-339.
     
  5. Gibbs JC, Basinger KS, Fuller D. Moral maturity: Measuring the development of sociomoral reflection. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum; 1999.
     
  6. DuBois JM, Dueker JM. Teaching and assessing the responsible conduct of research: A delphi consensus panel report. The Journal of Research Administration. 2009;XL(1):49-70.
     
  7. Mercier H, Sperber D. Why do humans reason? Arguments for an argumentative theory. Behavioral and Brain Sciences. 2011;34(02):57-74.
     
  8. Authorship and Publication. 2009. Accessed March 6, 2012.
     
  9. Shamoo AE, Resnik DB. Responsible Conduct of Research. 2nd ed. New York: Oxford University Press; 2009.
     
  10. Jones A. Changing Traditions of Authorship. In: Jones A, McLellan F, eds. Ethical Issues in Biomedical Publication. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press; 2000:3-29.
     
  11. LaFollette MC. Stealing into Print--Fraud, Plagiarism, and Misconduct in Scientific Publishing. Berkeley: University of California Press; 1992.
     
  12. Flanagin A, Carey LA, Fontanarose PB, et al. Prevalence of Articles with Honorary and Ghost Authors in Peer-Reviewed Medical Journals. Journal of the American Medical Association. 1998;280:222-224.
     
  13. Steneck NH. Introduction to the Responsible Conduct of Research. In: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Research Integrity, eds. Updated Ed. ed. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office; 2007.
     
  14. Hudson J, McLellan A, McLellan F, eds. Ethical Issues in Biomedical Publication. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press; 2000.
     
  15. DuBois JM, Kraus E, Vasher M. The development of a taxonomy of wrongdoing in medical practice and research. American journal of preventive medicine. Jan 2012;42(1):89-98.
     
  16. Office of Research Integrity. Case Summary--Eric Poehlman. http://ori.hhs.gov/poehlman_notice; 2005
     
  17. Godlee F, Smith J, Marcovitch H. Wakefield’s article linking MMR vaccine and autism was fraudulent. BMJ. 2011-01-05 00:00:00 2011;342.
     
  18. Fanelli D. How many scientists fabricate and falsify research? A systematic review and meta-analysis of survey data. PloS one. Jan 1 2009;4(5):e5738.
     
  19. Titus SL, Wells JA, Rhoades LJ. Repairing research integrity. Nature. Jun 19 2008;453(7198):980-982.
     
  20. Koocher GP, Keith-Spiegel P. Peers nip misconduct in the bud. Nature. Jul 22 2010;466(7305):438-440.
     
  21. Science and engineering indicators 2012. Share of internationally coauthored S&E articles worldwide. National Science Foundation; 2012. http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/seind12/c5/tt05-18.htm. Accessed June 22, 2012.
     
  22. National Institutes of Health. NIH Data Sharing Policy and Implementation Guidance. March 5, 20032003.
     
  23. Holden C. Paper retracted following genome data breach. Science. 2009;325(5947):1486-1487.
     
  24. National Research Act. Title II, Public Law 93-3481974.
     
  25. 45 CFR 46 part A. Department of Health and Human Services: Basic Policy for Protection of Human Research Subjects1991.
     
  26. Resnik D. The Price of Truth: How Money Affects the Norms of Science. New York: Oxford University Press; 2007.
     
  27. Sieber JE. Planning ethically responsible research: A guide for students and internal review boards. Vol 31. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications; 1992.
     
  28. DuBois JM. Is compliance a professional virtue of researchers? Reflections on promoting the responsible conduct of research. Ethics Behav. 2004;14(4):383-395.
     
  29. Lo B, Field M. Conflict of Interest in Medical Research, Education, and Practice. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2009.
     
  30. Kassirer JP. Financial conflict of interest: an unresolved ethical frontier. American journal of law & medicine. 2001;27(2-3):149-162.
     
  31. Campbell EG, Rao SR, DesRoches CM, et al. Physician professionalism and changes in physician-industry relationships from 2004 to 2009. Archives of internal medicine. Nov 8 2010;170(20):1820-1826.
     
  32. P.L. 96-517, Patent and Trademark Act Amendments of 1980, 37 CFR 401.
     
  33. Gelsinger P, Shamoo AE. Eight years after Jesse 's death, are human research subjects any safer? The Hastings Center report. Mar-Apr 2008;38(2):25-27.
     
  34. Liang BA, Mackey T. Confronting conflict: addressing institutional conflicts of interest in academic medical centers. American journal of law & medicine. 2010;36(1):136-187.
     
  35. Association of American Medical Colleges. The scientific basis of influence and reciprocity: A symposium. Washington DC: AAMC;2007.
     
  36. AAMC-AAU Advisory Committee on Financial Conflicts of Interest in Research. Protecting patients, preserving integrity, advancing health: Accelerating the implementation of COI policies in human subjects research. Washington DC: AAMC-AAU;2008.
     
  37. LaFollette M. Measuring Equity--the U.S. General Accounting Office Study of Peer Review. Science Communication. 1994;6:211-220.
     
  38. Haack S. Defending Science within Reason. New York: Prometheus Books; 2003.
     
  39. National Institutes of Health. Enhancing peer review: Expectation for service on NIH peer review and advisory groups. In: Health NIo, ed. Bethesda MD: National Institutes of Health; 2010.
     
  40. National Institutes of Health. Enhancing peer review: The NIH announced enhanced review criteria for evaluation of research applications received for potential FY2010 funding. In: Health NIo, ed. Bethesda MD: National Institutes of Health; 2009.
     
  41. Fletcher R, Fletcher S. Evidence for the Effectiveness of Peer Review. Science and engineering ethics. 1997;3(1):35-50.
     
  42. Shamoo AE. Editors, Peer Reviews, and Ethics. AAAS Perspectives. 1994;14:4-5.
     
  43. Shamoo AE. Role of Conflict of Interest in Public Advisory Councils. In: Cheney D, ed. Ethical Issues in Research. Vol 2. Frederick, MD: Accountablity in Research; 1993:55-75.
     
  44. Godlee F. The Ethics of Peer Review. In: Jones A, McLellan F, eds. Ethical Issues in Biomedical Publication. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press; 2000:59-84.
     
  45. Kopelman LM. Values and virtues: how should they be taught? Academic medicine : journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges. Dec 1999;74(12):1307-1310.
     
  46. Macrina F, ed Scientific Integrity: Textbook and Cases in Responsible Conduct of Research. 3 ed. Washington, DC: American Society for Microbiology Press; 2005.
     
  47. Pimple KD. Six domains of research ethics. A heuristic framework for the responsible conduct of research. Science and engineering ethics. Apr 2002;8(2):191-205.
     
  48. Reiser SJ, Bulger RE. The social responsibilities of biological scientists. Science and engineering ethics. 1997;3(2):137-143.
     
  49. Beckwith J, Huang F. Should we make a fuss? A case for social responsibility in science. Nature biotechnology. Dec 2005;23(12):1479-1480.
     
  50. Marchant GE, Bird SJ. Editors' overview: forbidding science? Science and engineering ethics. Sep 2009;15(3):263-269.

 

Source URL: https://ori.hhs.gov/rcr-casebook-references