An official website of the United States government
Nucleotide sequence reagents underpin molecular techniques that have been applied across hundreds of thousands of publications. We have previously reported wrongly identified nucleotide sequence reagents in human research publications and described a semi-automated screening tool Seek & Blastn to fact-check their claimed status. We applied Seek & Blastn to screen >11,700 publications across five literature corpora, including all original publications in Gene from 2007 to 2018 and all original open-access publications in Oncology Reports from 2014 to 2018. After manually checking Seek & Blastn outputs for >3,400 human research articles, we identified 712 articles across 78 journals that described at least one wrongly identified nucleotide sequence. Verifying the claimed identities of >13,700 sequences highlighted 1,535 wrongly identified sequences, most of which were claimed targeting reagents for the analysis of 365 human protein-coding genes and 120 non-coding RNAs. The 712 problematic articles have received >17,000 citations, including citations by human clinical trials. Given our estimate that approximately one-quarter of problematic articles may misinform the future development of human therapies, urgent measures are required to address unreliable gene research articles.
more »
« less
Protection of the human gene research literature from contract cheating organizations known as research paper mills
Abstract Human gene research generates new biology insights with translational potential, yet few studies have considered the health of the human gene literature. The accessibility of human genes for targeted research, combined with unreasonable publication pressures and recent developments in scholarly publishing, may have created a market for low-quality or fraudulent human gene research articles, including articles produced by contract cheating organizations known as paper mills. This review summarises the evidence that paper mills contribute to the human gene research literature at scale and outlines why targeted gene research may be particularly vulnerable to systematic research fraud. To raise awareness of targeted gene research from paper mills, we highlight features of problematic manuscripts and publications that can be detected by gene researchers and/or journal staff. As improved awareness and detection could drive the further evolution of paper mill-supported publications, we also propose changes to academic publishing to more effectively deter and correct problematic publications at scale. In summary, the threat of paper mill-supported gene research highlights the need for all researchers to approach the literature with a more critical mindset, and demand publications that are underpinned by plausible research justifications, rigorous experiments and fully transparent reporting.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 1956338
- PAR ID:
- 10384445
- Publisher / Repository:
- Oxford University Press
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Nucleic Acids Research
- Volume:
- 50
- Issue:
- 21
- ISSN:
- 0305-1048
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- p. 12058-12070
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Abstract Because research in science, engineering and medical fields advances incrementally, researchers routinely write papers that build directly on their prior work. While each new research article is expected to make a novel contribution, researchers often need to repeat some material—method details, background and so on—from their previous articles, a practice called ‘text recycling’. While increasing awareness of text recycling has led to the proliferation of policies, journal editorials and scholarly articles addressing the practice, these documents tend to employ inconsistent terminology—using different terms to name the same key ideas and, even more problematic, using the same terms with different meanings. These inconsistencies make it difficult for readers to know precisely how the ideas or expectations articulated in one document relate to those of others. This paper first clarifies the problems with current terminology, showing how key terms are used inconsistently across publisher policies for authors, guidelines for editors and textbooks on research ethics. It then offers a new taxonomy of text‐recycling practices with terms designed to align with the acceptability of these practices in common research writing and publishing contexts.more » « less
-
Personal informatics (PI) has become an area of significant research over the past decade, maturing into a sub-field that seeks to support people from many backgrounds and life contexts in collecting and finding value in their personal data. PI research includes a focus on people with chronic conditions as a monolithic group, but currently fails to distinguish the needs of people with motor disabilities (MD). To understand how current PI literature addresses those needs, we conducted a mapping review on PI publications engaged with people with MD. We report results from 50 publications identified in the ACM DL, Pubmed, JMIR, SCOPUS, and IEEE Xplore. Our analysis shows significant incompatibilities between the needs of individuals with MD and the ways that PI literature supports them. We also found inconsistencies in the ways that disability levels are reported, that PI literature for MD excludes non-health-related data domains, and an insufficient focus on PI tools' accessibility and usability for some MD users. In contrast with Epstein et al.'s [36] recent PI review, behavior change and habit awareness were the most common motivation in these publications. Finally, many of the reviewed articles reported involvement by caregivers, trainers, healthcare providers, and researchers across the PI stages. In addition to these insights, we provide recommendations for designing PI technology through a user-centric lens that will broaden the scope of PI and include people regardless of their motor abilities.more » « less
-
In the field of hazards and disaster research, which often involves rapid reconnaissance assessments in unfamiliar cultural and social contexts, cultural issues have been exacerbated by the increasing frequency and intensity of disasters, which propel more researchers into the field and into contexts where they may lack community-based cultural knowledge. In quick response research, in particular, rarely is there time or adequate resources for individual researchers or research teams to properly prepare for new cultural contexts where they will study affected populations. The challenges associated with hazards and disaster researchers conducting these types of reconnaissance studies have come under increased ethical scrutiny, as technological advancements have simultaneously allowed for new and different types of data collection. Through a systematic review of the cultural competence literature, this project (1) examines existing cultural competence strategies, interventions, tools, plans, and training protocols as applicable for hazards and disaster researchers; (2) introduces a comprehensive framework for building cultural competence for hazards and disaster researchers; and (3) identifies gaps and high-priority research areas to advance cultural competence among members of the research community. This research argues that applying a cultural competence framework in hazards and disaster research offers the ability to improve interplay between researchers and participants (disaster survivors, emergency practitioners, and other service agencies) in order to better serve the individuals, families, and communities most affected by natural hazards, social inequalities, and consequent disasters. This dataset includes all the publications for this systematic literature review, which were published from January 1, 1960 to March 20, 2018 in English, including journal articles, books, book chapters, and grey literature (governmental and non-governmental organization reports).more » « less
-
Despite the long-standing calls for increased levels of interdisciplinary research as a way to address society’s grand challenges, most science is still disciplinary. To understand the slow rate of convergence to more interdisciplinary research, we examine 154,021 researchers who received a PhD in a biomedical field between 1970 and 2013, measuring the interdisciplinarity of their articles using the disciplinary composition of references. We provide a range of evidence that interdisciplinary research is impactful, but that those who conduct it face early career impediments. The researchers who are initially the most interdisciplinary tend to stop publishing earlier in their careers—it takes about 8 y for half of the researchers in the top percentile in terms of initial interdisciplinarity to stop publishing, compared to more than 20 y for moderately interdisciplinary researchers (10th to 75th percentiles). Moreover, perhaps in response to career challenges, initially interdisciplinary researchers on average decrease their interdisciplinarity over time. These forces reduce the stock of interdisciplinary researchers who can train future cohorts. Indeed, new graduates tend to be less interdisciplinary than the stock of active researchers. We show that interdisciplinarity does increase over time despite these dampening forces because initially disciplinary researchers become more interdisciplinary as their careers progress.more » « less
