Unethical practices within medical research and publication – An exploratory study.

The data produced by the scientific community impacts on academia, clinicians, and the general public; therefore, the scientific community and other regulatory bodies have been focussing on ethical codes of conduct. Despite the measures taken by several research councils, unethical research, publishing and/or reviewing behaviours still take place. This exploratory study considers some of the current unethical practices and the reasons behind them and explores the ways to discourage these within research and other professional disciplinary bodies. These interviews/discussions with PhD students, technicians, and academics/principal investigators (PIs) (N=110) were conducted mostly in European higher education institutions including UK, Italy, Ireland, Portugal, Czech Republic and Netherlands. Through collegiate discussions, sharing experiences and by examining previously published/reported information, authors have identified several less reported behaviours. Some of these practices are mainly influenced either by the undue institutional expectations of research esteem or by changes in the journal review process. These malpractices can be divided in two categories relating to (a) methodological malpractices including data management, and (b) those that contravene publishing ethics. The former is mostly related to “committed bias”, by which the author selectively uses the data to suit their own hypothesis, methodological malpractice relates to selection of out-dated protocols that are not suited to the intended work. Although these are usually unintentional, incidences of intentional manipulations have been reported to authors of this study. For example, carrying out investigations without positive (or negative) controls; but including these from a previous study. Other methodological malpractices include unfair repetitions to gain statistical significance, or retrospective ethical approvals. In contrast, the publication related malpractices such as authorship malpractices, ethical clearance irregularities have also been reported. The findings also suggest a globalised approach with clear punitive measures for offenders is needed to tackle this problem.N/

'e’-thinking teaching and assessment to uphold academic integrity: lessons learned from emergency distance learning

Covid-19 pandemic had an impact on many day-to-day activities but one of the biggest collateral impacts was felt by the education sector. The nature and the complexity of higher education is such that no matter how prepared we are as faculty, how planned our teaching and assessments, faculty are all too aware of the adjustments that have to be made to course plans, assessments designed, content delivery strategies and so on once classes begin. Faculties find themselves changing, modifying and deviating from original plans to ensure accessibility and inclusiveness, this may be due to a variety of reasons such as student abilities, behaviour, disturbances and even outside factors that may be political, environmental, social etc. Majority of the time, faculty are prepared for the change that needs to be incorporated and are quick to adjust. However, no one expected the disruption to education that was caused by COVID19 pandemic. The world came to a standstill while schools and universities scrambled to push learning to the digital space. It was important to try to ensure continuity of learning for students, but the issue of integrity came to the forefront by summertime. Faculties were suddenly expected to restructure their lessons, delivery, teaching and assessing digitally, at the same time ensuring and upholding integrity of the concepts taught and assessed. This has neither been easy or straightforward because the situation was unprecedented with little or no prior documentation or guidelines to help. Recognising this gap, this paper is an attempt at providing exploratory findings from authors’ experiences in their respective institutions over the ensuing months. The paper attempts to record the changes made by the faculty and colleagues to lessons and assessments with particular focus on how technology has been used to help restructure classes, deliver lessons and assess students which have aided in minimizing the likelihood of students cheating. The paper further narrates the reflective changes that were made in response to experience, student/external examiners feedback etc.N/

Assisting you to advance with ethics in research: an introduction to ethical governance and application procedures

Ethics and ethical behaviour are the fundamental pillars of a civilised society. The focus on ethical behaviour is indispensable in certain fields such as medicine, finance, or law. In fact, ethics gets precedence with anything that would include, affect, transform, or influence upon individuals, communities or any living creatures. Many institutions within Europe have set up their own committees to focus on or approve activities that have ethical impact. In contrast, lesser-developed countries (worldwide) are trying to set up these committees to govern their academia and research. As the first European consortium established to assist academic integrity, European Network for Academic Integrity (ENAI), we felt the importance of guiding those institutions and communities that are trying to conduct research with ethical principles. We have established an ethical advisory working group within ENAI with the aim to promote ethics within curriculum, research and institutional policies. We are constantly researching available data on this subject and committed to help the academia to convey and conduct ethical behaviour. Upon preliminary review and discussion, the group found a disparity in understanding, practice and teaching approaches to ethical applications of research projects among peers. Therefore, this short paper preliminarily aims to critically review the available information on ethics, the history behind establishing ethical principles and its international guidelines to govern research. The paper is based on the workshop conducted in the 5th International conference Plagiarism across Europe and Beyond, in Mykolas Romeris University, Lithuania in 2019. During the workshop, we have detailed a) basic needs of an ethical committee within an institution; b) a typical ethical approval process (with examples from three different universities); and c) the ways to obtain informed consent with some examples. These are summarised in this paper with some example comparisons of ethical approval processes from different universities. We believe this paper will provide guidelines on preparing and training both researchers and research students in appropriately upholding ethical practices through ethical approval processes.European Network of Academic Integrity; University of Derb

Is Peer Review Fit for Purpose? Enhancing Integrity and Professional Standards in Publications

Peer review is crucial for academic research, when checking manuscripts for publishing, considering proposals for research funding, and deciding which submitted contributions to include in conference programmes. Peer reviewers are tasked with assessing readability, scientific merit, accuracy, reliability, novelty, relevance, completeness and focus. Conscientious, experienced peer reviewers add considerable value to scientific manuscripts by working with authors, especially Early Career Researchers (ECRs), to help them achieve the required standards set by editors and publishers. Given the centrality of peer review to academia, it is easy to forget that peer review is often voluntary and unpaid, requiring considerable time and resources. Without peer reviewers, editors and publishers, and conference organisers, many of whom are also voluntary and unpaid, would be tasked with reviewing submissions. This would require considerable time and diverse knowledge and skills, even when the scope of topics for submissions is narrow. The recent substantial rise in the number of journal article retractions, affecting both large and small publishers, raises questions about why the traditional checks and balances put in place by the publishers, especially peer review, do not uncover the problems. This paper will explore both the merits of effective peer review and root causes of problems currently being experienced, with consideration of how peer review could be improved to serve future requirements

Initiating count down - gamification of academic integrity

Any problem is a problem until a solution is designed and implemented. This paper reports on a workshop that highlights preliminary work done by the working group on Gamification in the scope of European Network for Academic Integrity (ENAI), which aims to explore the possibility of developing and testing a gamified learning module on academic integrity values. In this paper, the group aims to look at proposing steps we are currently using to develop storyboards of scenarios for the first phase of the project, which were presented at the 6th International Conference Plagiarism Across Europe and Beyond 2020 held virtually in Dubai as a workshop. The study also presents updated findings and scenarios drawn from the workshop conducted and audience feedback, in the following sections that pave the way for the future stages of the gamification process. This serves as a guide to academics and researchers in academic integrity who may wish to study gamification and apply it to develop their own modules for their learning modules

Deterring Academic Integrity Breaches: The Roles of Institutions, Academics, and Support Service

©2025, University of Toronto Press. This is an author produced version of a paper published in Journal of Scholarly Publishing, uploaded in accordance with the publisher’s self- archiving policy. The final published version (version of record) is available online at the link. Some minor differences between this version and the final published version may remain. We suggest you refer to the final published version should you wish to cite from it

Retrospective analysis of plagiaristic practices within a cinematic industry in India – a tip in the ocean of icebergs

Music plagiarism is defined as using tune, or melody that would closely imitate with another author’s music without proper attributions. It may occur either by stealing a musical idea (a melody or motif) or sampling (a portion of one sound, or tune is copied into a different song). Unlike the traditional music, the Indian cinematic music is extremely popular amongst the public. Since the expectations of the public for songs that are enjoyable are high, many music directors are seeking elsewhere to “borrow” tunes. Whilst a vast majority of Indian cinemagoers may not have noticed these plagiarised tunes, some journalists and vigilant music lovers have noticed these activities. This study has taken the initiative to investigate the extent of plagiaristic activities within one Indian cinematic music industry. A list of plagiarised songs was produced by using YouTube® searches for “comparative videos” made by the vigilant music lovers about accused/detected music plagiarism. Some of these individuals were also interviewed to understand their views on this. During the investigation, it was possible to identify a vast number of plagiarised tunes, snippets, or even the full songs. In fact, some of these examples’ dates to 1954, during the era when no one would have noticed plagiarism. The paper would highlight the similarities of these music files. It will also show some examples of the excuses/denial given by the composers and would try to highlight the attitudes of general public towards these types of activities

Doxorubicin resistant choriocarcinoma cell line derived spheroidal cells exhibit stem cell markers but reduced invasion.

Cell cycle-specific cancer chemotherapy is based on the ability of a drug to halt, minimise or destroy rapidly dividing cells. However, their efficacy is limited by the emergence of a self-renewing cell pool called “cancer stem cells” (CSC). Choriocarcinoma is a tumour of trophoblastic tissue. We, in this study, analysed whether spheroids generated from doxorubicin-treated and non-treated choriocarcinoma cell lines exhibit markers of stem cells. Two choriocarcinoma cell lines, namely JEG-3 and BeWo, were used in this study. Spheroids were generated from doxorubicin-treated cells and the non-treated cells under non-adherent condition, followed by analysis of stem-cell markers’ expression, namely NANOG, OCT4 and SOX2. Immunofluorescence analysis suggested a general increase in the markers’ concentration in spheroids relative to the parental cells. RT-qPCR and immunoblots showed an increase in the stem-cell marker expression in spheroids generated from doxorubicin-treated when compared to non-treated cells. In spheroids, Sox2 was significantly upregulated in doxorubicin-treated spheroids, whereas Nanog and Oct4 were generally downregulated when compared to non-treated spheroids. Both 2D and 3D invasion assays showed that the spheroids treated with doxorubicin exhibited reduced invasion. Our data suggest that choriocarcinoma cell lines may have the potential to produce spheroidal cells, yet the drug-treatment affected the invasion potential of spheroids