ACN - 101321555 Australasian Human Research Ethics Consultancy Services Pty Ltd (AHRECS)

Resource Library

Research Ethics MonthlyAbout Us

ResourcesResearch Misconduct

Australasian Human Research Ethics Consultancy Services Pty Ltd (AHRECS)

Purdue University Mounted a Child Nutrition Study. It Went Very, Very Wrong. – UNDARK (Amy Gastelum | November 2017)0

Posted by Admin in on December 26, 2017
 

Camp DASH was supposed to be a gold-standard study of diet-mitigated hypertension in adolescents. Instead, it became a venue for chaos.

ON JULY 18, an adolescent girl participating in a camp-like nutrition study at Purdue University went to the bathroom at the school’s Tarkington Hall dormitory to take a shower. Soon after, her peers told her there was a video of that shower on social media. The events that followed eventually shut down an $8.8 million research study funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and left one of the nation’s top research institutions circling the wagons as it scrambled to investigate what had gone wrong.

The girl was one of 78 participants in a study called Camp DASH — short for Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension — which was being led by Purdue’s Department of Nutrition Science. Researchers, assessing the effects of a low sodium diet on 11- to 15-year-old boys and girls with elevated blood pressure, were set to host the children in campus housing for seven weeks over the summer.

Read the rest of this discussion piece

COPE policy and procedure updates added to the resource library0

Posted by Admin in on December 18, 2017
 

In recent weeks the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) has released a number of important updates to its policies, procedures and guidance material. These include:

Core practices
Changes to COPE’s disputes process
COPE Sanctions Policy

Scholarly Kitchen has a useful discussion piece about these changes and their significance for researchers.

COPE’s policies, procedures and resource material reflect good practice used by a significant proportion of publishers around the globe), can be important for international collaborations (e.g. in terms of a shared understanding of authorship criteria) and could be an important reference for Australian research institution if a lot of detail is removed from the Australian Code.

COPE Introduces Less Specific Member Rules Along with a New Policy on Expulsions0

Posted by Admin in on December 18, 2017
 

The Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) was founded in 1997 to provide guidance and education around the growing number of ethics issues facing journals. Last week COPE announced changes to its Code of Conduct as well as a new policy on sanctions against member journal editors and publishers that do not follow their “principles.”

I put “principles” in quotes because COPE seems to be making big changes and the language is important.

Until recently, members of COPE agreed to adhere to their Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors (and Publishers). Members are also agreeing to follow the Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing.

Read the rest of this discussion piece

Changes to COPE’s disputes process0

Posted by Admin in on December 18, 2017
 

The COPE complaints process was established in 2010 (revised in 2014) as a means of providing independent guidance on disputed matters of publication ethics for our member editors and publishers.

While the members of the Complaints subcommittee have worked tirelessly to provide advice and to assist in resolving complaints brought to the subcommittee’s attention, often those results have been frustrated by issues including:

a) lack of clarity about the scope of the subcommittee’s remit;

Read the rest of this announcement

0