• Users Online: 1236
  • Print this page
  • Email this page
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2020  |  Volume : 8  |  Issue : 2  |  Page : 35-39

Prevalence and patterns of research misconduct among medical college faculties


1 Professor and Head, Department of Community Medicine, Malla Reddy Institute of Medical Sciences, Suraram, Hyderabad, India
2 Associate Professor, Department of Community Medicine, Malla Reddy Institute of Medical Sciences, Suraram, Hyderabad, India
3 Assistant Professor, Department of Community Medicine, Malla Reddy Institute of Medical Sciences, Suraram, Hyderabad, India

Correspondence Address:
P R Kokiwar
Professor and Head, Department of Community Medicine, Malla Reddy Institute of Medical Sciences, Suraram, Hyderabad
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/2321-7006.301997

Rights and Permissions

Background: With availability of the internet in all hands, the information on any topic is widely available. It is easy to access and many journals are open access. Hence it is tempting to easily copy paste the material to save time and serves as short cut for various purpose. Objective: To study prevalence and factors for research misconduct among medical college faculties Methods: Cross sectional study was carried out in two medical colleges in 58 faculty members using self-administered questionnaire. Confidentiality was ensured. Questionnaire consisted of questions pertaining to self-declaration of committing research misconduct. Next part was related to their opinions on factors, action to be taken and prevention related to research misconduct. Results: 68.9% knew what is plagiarism but only 8.6% knew types of plagiarism. Prevalence of research misconduct as faculty was 62.1%, (plagiarism=41.4%, fabrication=18.9%, falsification=1.7%). Prevalence of research misconduct as postgraduate was 91.4% (plagiarism=63.8%, fabrication=25.9% and falsification=1.7%). Lack of facilities and lack of time was the major response leading to research misconduct in 25.9% and 24.1% respectively. Most common action suggested was removal of published article and disciplinary warning by 37.9% of responses each. 8.6% of responses said that it is not possible to prevent research misconduct. Majority of responses were in favor of training followed by increasing awareness i.e. 56.9% and 51.7% respectively for prevention of plagiarism. Conclusion: Commitment of research misconduct was very high in publications as faculty and still more in dissertations as postgraduates. Lack of awareness, time, facilities, resources were responsible factors. Training and increasing awareness were the suggested measures.


[PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed70    
    Printed2    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded17    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal