1 / 17

The Darsee Case Duquesne University Undergraduate Research Program Ethics Forum

The Darsee Case Duquesne University Undergraduate Research Program Ethics Forum. Lisa Clark, Zachary Cutia , Sadie Clifford, Anderson Chen, Lauren Ciccariello. Introduction. Fraud – a major issue in society

yuma
Télécharger la présentation

The Darsee Case Duquesne University Undergraduate Research Program Ethics Forum

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The Darsee CaseDuquesne UniversityUndergraduate Research Program Ethics Forum Lisa Clark, Zachary Cutia, Sadie Clifford, Anderson Chen, Lauren Ciccariello

  2. Introduction • Fraud – a major issue in society • Impacts on: research of other working scientists, reliability of the published literature, public attitudes • Authority can influence credibility of fraudulent behavior • Eminent investigator • Prestigious institution • Prominent grant agency • Highly respected journal

  3. John Darsee- Background • Undergraduate from Notre Dame • Medical degree from Indiana University - 1974 • Clinical & research work at Emory – 1974-1979 • Worked for Eugene Braunwald at the Brigham and Women’s and Beth Israel Hospitals Eugene Braunwald

  4. The Case • May 1981- Darsee was working for an NIH-funded project: ischaemic myocardium study on animals • Fraudulent behavior - Labeled experiments with durations of 24 seconds, 72 hours, one week, and two weeks… when only minutes had passed • Clashing evidence - Duke and Johns Hopkins Universities, and the VA Medical Center – different data than Darsee

  5. Investigation • A committee of eight Harvard faculty members, as well as an NIH committee, investigated • The Harvard committee found substantial evidence of data fabrication • NIH looked into his other publications • Systematic falsification of data in five other studies

  6. Outcomes • Several of Darsee’s publications were retracted • NIH demanded $122,371 grant returned from Harvard • Barred from NIH funds for ten years

  7. Reasons for Fabricating Data • Publish or perish • Stress/Pressure • Maintain academic achievements • Job promotion • Meeting expectations • High admiration for Dr. Braunwald • Experiments not working • Personal issues • Death of his father

  8. What John Darsee Breached • Trust • Colleagues • Institution • Scientific Community (peers, journals, funding agencies) • Society • Physician’s Oath • Serving as a role model

  9. Consequences • Faulty data impeded scientific discovery • Potential harm to patients • Essentially wasted grant funds

  10. Who is Responsible? • Can’t we all agree that the author is responsible for fabricated data? But what about • Coauthors? • If they don’t fulfill their obligations are they guilty too?

  11. Coauthors • "While not all coauthors may be familiar with all aspects of the research presented in their paper, all collaborations should have in place an appropriate process for reviewing and ensuring the accuracy and validity of the reported results, and all coauthors should be aware of this process.” • But should this really just let them off the leash? American Physical Society. “Ethics and Values 02.2 APS GUIDELINES FOR PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT.” APS 2002.

  12. Editor flow chart for suspected fabricated data Wager, Liz. What to do if you suspect fabricated data(b) suspected fabricated data in a published article. Flow Chart. Committee on Publication Ethics. May 2011. June 2013. <http://publicationethics.org/files/u7140/Flowchart%20Fabricated%20B%20revised.pdf>

  13. Summary • What leads to fabrication of data and results? • Intense atmosphere • Limited mentoring by senior scientists • Expectations • Applying for and receiving grants • History

  14. Summary • What is the correct protocol for handling fabrication cases? • Who’s job is it to report fabrication? • Where do you report funding cases? • Who investigates? • How are punishments determined?

  15. Summary • Darsee was found guilty of fabricating data in publications spanning 14 years • Harvard was asked to return grant money to NIH • Fellowship was terminated • Banned from NIH grant funding for 10 years

  16. References • Kochan, Carol Ann, and John M. Budd. "The persistence of fraud in the literature: the Darsee case." JASIS 43.7 (1992): 488-493. • Altman, Larry, and Laurie Melcher. "Fraud in science." British medical journal (Clinical research ed.) 286.6383 (1983): 2003. • American Physical Society. “Ethics and Values 02.2 APS GUIDELINES FOR PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT.” APS 2002. • Wager, Liz. What to do if you suspect fabricated data(b) suspected fabricated data in a published article. Flow Chart. Committee on Publication Ethics. May 2011. June 2013. http://publicationethics.org/files/u7140/Flowchart%20Fabricated%20B%20revised.pdf • http://web.centre.edu/muzyka/articles/Culliton1983.pdf

  17. References • Wallis, C., Wymelenberg, S. & Shapiro, R. (1983, 2 28). Medicine: Fraud in a harvard lab. Time magazine, Retrieved from http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,955142,00.html • [ In analyses of dr. john darsee's dishonest behavio... ]. (1983, Apr 02). Boston Globe (Pre-1997 Fulltext). Retrieved from http://ezproxy.library.cabrini.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/294194964?accountid=40240 • Broad, W. J. (1983, Jun 14). Notorious darsee case shakes assumptions about science. New York Times. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.library.cabrini.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/424658715?accountid=40240

More Related