FREE NEJM E-TOC    HOME   |   SUBSCRIBE   |   CURRENT ISSUE   |   PAST ISSUES   |   COLLECTIONS   |   Search Term  Advanced Search

Sign in | Get NEJM's E-Mail Table of Contents — Free | Subscribe

Previous Volume 349:1280-1286 September 25, 2003 Number 13 Next

	Since this article has no abstract, we have provided an extract of the first 100 words of the full text and any section headings.

	Full Text PDF PDA Full Text Purchase this article Add to Personal Archive Add to Citation Manager Notify a Friend E-mail When Cited E-mail When Letters Appear PubMed Citation

In the United States, we have long relied on scientists' professional commitment to truth and honesty to ensure that scientific fraud does not occur. Although there are federal regulatory procedures that address misconduct,¹ most of the daily work of oversight is delegated to the institutions at which research is conducted. Institutions, in turn, depend heavily on the integrity and self-policing efforts of the researchers themselves.

Although it has many advantages, the institution-centered regulatory framework may not provide adequate protection of due process for accused investigators. Our view is that the current regulatory structure falls short of the optimal balance between . . . [Full Text of this Article]

History of Federal Oversight

Due Process in Misconduct Proceedings Today

Comparisons with Hospital Credentialing and Billing Fraud

Striking a Balance

Conclusions

Source Information

From the Department of Health Policy and Management, Harvard School of Public Health (M.M.M., T.A.B.); the Department of Medicine, Harvard Medical School (T.A.B.); and Brigham and Women's Hospital (T.A.B.) — all in Boston.

Address reprint requests to Dr. Brennan at Brigham and Women's Hospital, 75 Francis St., PBB4, Boston, MA 02115, or at tabrennan@partners.org.

This article has been cited by other articles:

• Redman, B. K., Caplan, A. L. (2005). Off with their Heads: The Need to Criminalize some forms of Scientific Misconduct. J Law Med Ethics 33: 345-346  
• Daroff, R. B., Griggs, R. C. (2004). Scientific misconduct and breach of publication ethics. Neurology 62: 352-353 [Full Text]  
• Maisonneuve, H., Berard, A., Bertrand, D. (2004). Britain's failure to tackle research misconduct: Britain is ahead of most countries. BMJ 328: 229-229 [Full Text]