Important Topics for Fostering Research Integrity by Research Performing and Research Funding Organizations: A Delphi Consensus Study

To foster research integrity (RI), it is necessary to address the institutional and system-of-science factors that influence researchers’ behavior. Consequently, research performing and research funding organizations (RPOs and RFOs) could develop comprehensive RI policies outlining the concrete steps they will take to foster RI. So far, there is no consensus on which topics are important to address in RI policies. Therefore, we conducted a three round Delphi survey study to explore which RI topics to address in institutional RI policies by seeking consensus from research policy experts and institutional leaders. A total of 68 RPO and 52 RFO experts, representing different disciplines, countries and genders, completed one, two or all rounds of the study. There was consensus among the experts on the importance of 12 RI topics for RPOs and 11 for RFOs. The topics that ranked highest for RPOs concerned education and training, supervision and mentoring, dealing with RI breaches, and supporting a responsible research process (e.g. through quality assurance). The highest ranked RFO topics concerned dealing with breaches of RI, conflicts of interest, and setting expectations on RPOs (e.g. about educating researchers about RI). Together with the research policy experts and institutional leaders, we developed a comprehensive overview of topics important for inclusion in the RI policies of RPOs and RFOs. The topics reflect preference for a preventative approach to RI, coupled with procedures for dealing with RI breaches. RPOs and RFOs should address each of these topics in order to support researchers in conducting responsible research. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11948-021-00322-9.

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

[2]  Heiko A. von der Gracht,et al.  Consensus measurement in Delphi studies , 2012 .

[3]  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.

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

[5]  Shane R. Brady Utilizing and Adapting the Delphi Method for Use in Qualitative Research , 2015 .

[6]  O. Leyser,et al.  The culture of scientific research , 2015, F1000Research.

[7]  Michael Kalichman,et al.  Rescuing Responsible Conduct of Research (RCR) Education , 2014, Accountability in research.

[8]  F. Hasson,et al.  Consulting the oracle: ten lessons from using the Delphi technique in nursing research. , 2006, Journal of advanced nursing.

[9]  M. D. de Villiers,et al.  The Delphi technique in health sciences education research , 2005, Medical teacher.

[10]  D. Shaw,et al.  How do researchers acquire and develop notions of research integrity? A qualitative study among biomedical researchers in Switzerland , 2019, BMC Medical Ethics.

[11]  F. Hasson,et al.  A critical review of the Delphi technique as a research methodology for nursing. , 2001, International journal of nursing studies.

[12]  L. Bouter,et al.  Ranking major and minor research misbehaviors: results from a survey among participants of four World Conferences on Research Integrity , 2016, Research Integrity and Peer Review.

[13]  L. M. Bouter,et al.  COSMIN Risk of Bias tool to assess the quality of studies on reliability or measurement error of outcome measurement instruments: a Delphi study , 2020, BMC Medical Research Methodology.

[14]  Philip G Boysen,et al.  Just culture: a foundation for balanced accountability and patient safety. , 2013, The Ochsner journal.

[15]  G. Veltri,et al.  Research integrity: nine ways to move from talk to walk , 2020, Nature.

[16]  Research integrity is much more than misconduct , 2019, Nature.

[17]  Elizabeth Iorns,et al.  New forms of checks and balances are needed to improve research integrity , 2014, F1000Research.

[18]  Ann E Mills,et al.  COI Policies: Tax Dollars Should Not Be Used to Fund U.S. Institutions Not Making the Grade , 2012, Accountability in research.

[19]  J. Youngblut,et al.  Institutional research responsibilities and needed infrastructure. , 2002, Journal of nursing scholarship : an official publication of Sigma Theta Tau International Honor Society of Nursing.

[20]  Scott W. Moore,et al.  Maintaining Research and Publication Integrity. , 2019, Clinical chemistry.

[21]  B. Feldman,et al.  Defining consensus: a systematic review recommends methodologic criteria for reporting of Delphi studies. , 2014, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[22]  Mitch Brown,et al.  Personal Motivations and Systemic Incentives: Scientists on Questionable Research Practices , 2020, Science and Engineering Ethics.

[23]  Janet Stemwedel Life after Misconduct: Promoting Rehabilitation while Minimizing Damage , 2014, Journal of microbiology & biology education.

[24]  Iva S. Kostadinova,et al.  Key Learning Outcomes for Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics Education in Europe: A Modified Delphi Study , 2018, Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics.

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

[26]  J. Sim,et al.  Saturation in qualitative research: exploring its conceptualization and operationalization , 2017, Quality & Quantity.

[27]  Guy Paré,et al.  A systematic assessment of rigor in information systems ranking-type Delphi studies , 2013, Inf. Manag..

[28]  Vincent Richman,et al.  A Tale of Two Perspectives: Regulation Versus Self-Regulation. A Financial Reporting Approach (from Sarbanes–Oxley) for Research Ethics , 2012, Sci. Eng. Ethics.

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

[30]  Kristian Skrede Gleditsch,et al.  Preregistering Qualitative Research: A Delphi Study , 2020, International Journal of Qualitative Methods.

[31]  R. Hamilton,et al.  Internet Recruitment and E-Mail Interviews in Qualitative Studies , 2006, Qualitative health research.

[32]  B. Nemery,et al.  Guidance on research integrity: no union in Europe , 2013, The Lancet.

[33]  P. Drenth Institutional Dealing with Scientific Misconduct , 2015 .

[34]  ProTon Europe,et al.  Fostering Integrity in Research , 2017 .

[35]  Malhar N. Kumar A Theoretical Comparison of the Models of Prevention of Research Misconduct , 2010, Accountability in research.

[36]  O. Sibony,et al.  Using and Reporting the Delphi Method for Selecting Healthcare Quality Indicators: A Systematic Review , 2011, PloS one.

[37]  C. Powell The Delphi technique: myths and realities. , 2003, Journal of advanced nursing.

[38]  L. B. Mokkink,et al.  COSMIN methodology for evaluating the content validity of patient-reported outcome measures: a Delphi study , 2018, Quality of Life Research.

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

[40]  L. Horn Promoting responsible research conduct in a developing world academic context , 2013 .

[41]  Xavier Bosch,et al.  Tie funding to research integrity , 2010, Nature.

[42]  D. Ford,et al.  Beyond “Compliance”: The Role of Institutional Culture in Promoting Research Integrity , 2010, Academic medicine : journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges.