[Skip to Content]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address 54.197.65.227. Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
[Skip to Content Landing]
Article
February 17, 1993

Scientific MisconductNew Definition, Procedures, and Office— Perhaps a New Leaf

Author Affiliations

From the Scientific Publications Group, American Medical Association, Chicago, Ill, and the Institute for Health Policy Studies, University of California, San Francisco (Dr Rennie), and the Office of the Associate Vice-Chancellor for Research, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (Ms Gunsalus).

JAMA. 1993;269(7):915-917. doi:10.1001/jama.1993.03500070095037
Abstract

The good behavior of scientists might seem remote from the concerns of the physician. But the practice of medicine is based on science, which means that it is grounded on the integrity of the biomedical research community. For that reason alone, the matter would deserve our attention, but in addition, many scientists have medical degrees. We expect those scientist-physicians to share the high standards of the medical profession, and when they do not, the profession is damaged in the eyes of the public. Finally, if medical editors unwittingly publish fraudulent work in journals, as happens from time to time, reputations are tarnished. It is for these reasons that we are all involved in the debate over what has come to be called "scientific misconduct," and why JAMA is publishing the article by Dresser in this issue.1

Few medical articles are so uniquely important that patients would suffer were the

×