In this very interesting post, Professor Jennifer Byrne (University of Sydney Faculty of Medicine and Health, NSW Health Pathology) looks at the mistakes being made in circRNAs papers, even in high-profile, supposedly high-quality and distinguished publications.
She reflects on what might be the cause of those mistakes, why they are a big deal what could be the consequences.
Why is it that honest researchers make such a serious mistake?
Is a sign of lack of experience, insight and knowledge? Or is it an indication something far more dubious and questionable?
This very accessible post does a great job of explaining complex genetic concepts in lay terms.
This points to the need for research institutions and research publishers to have sufficient expertise in the topic, to truly understand circRNAs and reagents.
If someone asked you for some recommended reading or viewing to help them understand human research ethics, animal ethics or research integrity, what would you recommend?
The policies and standards issued by National governments, learned societies, funding bodies and academic publications are generally not especially engaging or entertaining.
In this blog post, Sally Dalton-Brown discusses a couple of options from the streaming and fiction publishing offerings.
They won’t exactly discuss, explain or define the principles of ethical or responsible conduct. Neither will they explain how to adhere to national requirements or instutiona policy. That isn’t surprising, but that is probably not the point. Entertainment, enjoyment and a bit of fun is a great way to engage people with the important elements of ethical and responsible behaviour in the design and conduct of research.
This material could be usefully included in the resource library for members of an institution’s research ethics committee.
In this thought-provoking post, Nik Zeps (a consultant with AHRECS and a partner at Chrysalis) discusses the serious harm (in terms of reputation and career, as well as lost useful lines of inquiry) when there are complaints that allege ethical problems with clinical research.
These relate to situations where the clinical research is evaluating different kinds of intervention, where the evidence for the ‘accepted’ treatment might not be clear.
A misunderstanding of such research designs and a visceral reaction to apparent breaches aren’t helpful.
When such allegations are made, the researchers are rarely afforded an opportunity to respond and explain. If they were, one assumes that the manner could be easily cleared up.
We are embarrassed to admit in our own reporting of the cited case we really didn’t grasp the realities of what occurred or called out the very emotive reaction.
In this post find out why Gary is cranky about the proposed good practice guide for Australian Research Integrity Advisers.
#SPOILERALERT It is because he believes institutions need a network of collegiate Research Integrity Advisers to nurture and support a community of practice within their institution.
He also thinks mandatory reporting and telling people to speak in hypotheticals are STUPID.
While Gary describes this as a personal opinion, we agree. We don’t see how mandatory reporting will make serving as an RIA would be appealing or encourage anyone to consult them about whether an individual’s practice is appropriate.
AHRECS provides desktop audit and blueprint on Research Integrity within an institution and conducts professional development for RIAs.
Contact email@example.com to discuss.
All Australian research institutions that receive NHMRC or ARC research funding or otherwise operate under the auspices of Universities Australia
We’ve been anticipating the launch of the Retraction Watch database because we’re often asked by HDR candidates and other early career researchers how to
Dr Amanda Fernie, Manager Research Ethics & Integrity, Griffith University Dr Gary Allen, Senior Policy Officer, Griffith University AUSTRALIAN CODE
Gary Allen, Mark Israel and Colin Thomson|
In the 1980s and 1990s, many research institutions made the principled and commendable decision not to accept funding from the tobacco industry.
This reflected the recognition of the awful health impacts of tobacco use and the degree to which the industry was muddying the waters of public debate with academic and clinical research questioning the veracity of the overwhelming body of evidence that clearly showed the dire dangers of activity such as smoking. While we continue to be shocked by cases such those like the research of Hans J Eysenck (and this), for the main it is accepted that receiving funding from the tobacco industry is not in the public’s best interest.
During 2021 and 2022, AHRECS has been compiling an animal ethics team and we were thrilled when Dr Amanda Fernie joined our team. She is both an experienced researcher, a very experienced animal ethics officer and a former manager of a research and research integrity team at a large Australian university.
In this post, she discusses the animal ethics services AHRECS now provides, as well as the support we have been providing and the contribution we are making in the animal ethics sphere.
This is an excellent discussion of the range of services that AHRECS provides
For example, AHRECS has considerable experience in the design and delivery of professional development in the animal ethics space.
If you are interested in engaging AHRECS for us to assist with your institution’s animal ethics needs, send an email to firstname.lastname@example.org or alternatively you can contact Erich Von Dietze on email@example.com. Erich is the senior consultant who is leading our experienced animal ethics team.
Nerida Quatermass | University Copyright Officer | Project Manager, Creative Commons Australia at Queensland
In response to community feedback, from 1 November 2020, only papers, books and genuine resources will be posted to the AHRECS Resource Library; news and announcements will be posted to the feeds page. Searches of the site can include searches of the feed. Links to Research Ethics Monthly editions will also be posted to the feeds page. Please bear with us as we move all existing news items over to the feed. Eventually, this approach will make it easier to distinguish between research outputs and news items about human research ethics and research integrity.