Practices for Research Integrity Promotion in Research Performing Organisations and Research Funding Organisations: A Scoping Review

Research integrity (RI) is a continuously developing concept, and increasing emphasis is put on creating RI promotion practices. This study aimed to map the existing RI guidance documents at research performing organisations (RPOs) and research funding organisations (RFOs). A search of bibliographic databases and grey literature sources was performed, and retrieved documents were screened for eligibility. The search of bibliographical databases and reference lists of selected articles identified a total of 92 documents while the search of grey literature sources identified 118 documents for analysis. The retrieved documents were analysed based on their geographical origin, research field and organisational origin (RPO or RFO) of RI practices, types of guidance presented in them, and target groups to which RI practices are directed. Most of the identified practices were developed for research in general, and are applicable to all research fields (n = 117) and medical sciences (n = 78). They were mostly written in the form of guidelines (n = 136) and targeted researchers (n = 167). A comprehensive search of the existing RI promotion practices showed that initiatives mostly come from RPOs while only a few RI practices originate from RFOs. This study showed that more RI guidance documents are needed for natural sciences, social sciences, and humanities since only a small number of documents was developed specifically for these research fields. The explored documents and the gaps in knowledge identified in this study can be used for further development of RI promotion practices in RPOs and RFOs.

[1]  A. Marušić,et al.  Role of editors and journals in detecting and preventing scientific misconduct: strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats. , 2007, Medicine and law.

[2]  K. Okkenhaug,et al.  Integrity in Scientific Research: Creating an Environment that Promotes Responsible Conduct , 2003, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[3]  Policy,et al.  Open Science by Design , 2018 .

[4]  D. Moher,et al.  The Hong Kong Principles for assessing researchers: Fostering research integrity , 2020, PLoS biology.

[5]  Hub Zwart,et al.  Working with Research Integrity—Guidance for Research Performing Organisations: The Bonn PRINTEGER Statement , 2018, Science and Engineering Ethics.

[6]  D. Parker,et al.  Guidance for conducting systematic scoping reviews , 2015, International journal of evidence-based healthcare.

[7]  Nils Axelsen,et al.  Impact in Denmark of the Singapore Statement on Research Integrity and the European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity , 2015 .

[8]  J. Nobel Comparison of research quality guidelines in academic and nonacademic environments. , 1990, JAMA.

[9]  Ana Marušić,et al.  Research Integrity and Research Ethics in Professional Codes of Ethics: Survey of Terminology Used by Professional Organizations across Research Disciplines , 2015, PloS one.

[10]  S. Rijcke,et al.  Bibliometrics: The Leiden Manifesto for research metrics , 2015, Nature.

[11]  D. Resnik,et al.  Fostering Research Integrity , 2017, Accountability in research.

[12]  Nicholas H. Steneck,et al.  Fostering integrity in research: Definitions, current knowledge, and future directions , 2006, Science and Engineering Ethics.

[13]  F. L. Stepke INTERACADEMY COUNCIL/IAP- THE GLOBAL NETWORK OF SCIENCE ACADEMIES, 2012. Responsible Conduct in the Global Research Enterprise: A Policy Report , 2013 .

[14]  Wang Guoqian,et al.  The enlightenment on misconduct governance from Japan's Guidelines for Responding to Misconduct in Research , 2016 .

[15]  J. DuBois Is Compliance a Professional Virtue of Researchers? Reflections on Promoting the Responsible Conduct of Research , 2004, Ethics & behavior.

[16]  J. Ioannidis,et al.  Reproducibility in Science: Improving the Standard for Basic and Preclinical Research , 2015, Circulation research.

[17]  Sharon E. Straus,et al.  A scoping review on the conduct and reporting of scoping reviews , 2016, BMC Medical Research Methodology.

[18]  Michael Kalichman,et al.  A Brief History of RCR Education , 2013, Accountability in research.

[19]  R. Saginur,et al.  Guidelines for Research Ethics in the Social Sciences, Humanities, Law and Theology , 2016 .

[20]  Lisa Vogt,et al.  You've got this! The fundamental values of academic integrity , 2021 .

[21]  Lex Bouter,et al.  What Research Institutions Can Do to Foster Research Integrity , 2020, Sci. Eng. Ethics.

[22]  R. Ter Meulen,et al.  Addressing research integrity challenges: from penalising individual perpetrators to fostering research ecosystem quality care , 2019, Life Sciences, Society and Policy.

[23]  L. Bouter Fostering responsible research practices is a shared responsibility of multiple stakeholders. , 2017, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[24]  K. Dierickx,et al.  European Universities’ Guidance on Research Integrity and Misconduct , 2017, Journal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE.

[25]  B. Nemery,et al.  Heterogeneity in European Research Integrity Guidance , 2014, Journal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE.