Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-09T22:57:56.070Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

18 - The prevention and management of fraud and misconduct: the role of the LREC

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 January 2010

Sue Eckstein
Affiliation:
King's College London
Get access

Summary

Introduction

In an ideal world, fraud or even misconduct in clinical research would not exist; but we do not live in such a world. Accepting, therefore, that they can happen, research ethics committees – particularly local committees – have important roles to play in trying to prevent their occurrence and, if either does occur, to assist in their investigation.

Fraud is much less common than carelessness, though its incidence is difficult to quantify. Nevertheless some element of fraud in clinical trials has been variously estimated (Horton, 1996; Wells, 2001)at between 0.1 and 1% of research projects. As justification for this estimate, there are about 3000 sponsored clinical trials taking place at any one time in the United Kingdom. If the higher figure is assumed, this means that 30 studies may be currently being conducted that could include fraudulent or inaccurately compiled data. Even one case of fraud or other misconduct is one too many. Fraud is likely to exploit patients, deceive the sponsor and may skew the scientific database. Reports of proven cases of fraud in biomedical research are usually greeted with dismay and an element of surprise. Society expects doctors conducting research to be honest and honourable as well as competent – as, indeed, the vast majority of them are.

Definition of research misconduct

At a consensus conference held under the auspices of the Royal College of Physicians in Edinburgh in 1999, a number of definitions of misconduct were discussed. Research misconduct was viewed as including fabrication, falsification and/or suppression of data and plagiarism, as well as unintentional action that undermines the scientific value of the work.

Type
Chapter
Information
Manual for Research Ethics Committees
Centre of Medical Law and Ethics, King's College London
, pp. 79 - 82
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2003

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×