医学科研伦理-课件(下).ppt

Click to edit Master title style,Click to edit Master text styles,Second level,Third level,Fourth level,Fifth level,*,*,ORI found that the Respondent engaged in research misconduct by plagiarizing significant portions from research grant application R21 AR061881 that she had reviewed for NIAMS,NIH,and inserting that text into her submitted grant application R01 AR062378-01.Respondent also plagiarized significant portions of text from the following scientific articles and one U.S.patent application available on the Internet:,Settlement:,To have her research supervised;,Same to other institutes;,Excluded from any advisory capacity;,Definitions of misconduct,Research misconduct is defined as fabrication,falsification,or plagiarism in proposing,performing,or reviewing research,or in reporting research results,according to,42 CFR Part 93.,IMPORTANT:,Research misconduct does,NOT include honest error or differences of opinion,grants.nih.gov/grants/research_integrity/research_misconduct.htm?print=yes&,Luk Van Parijs,case,Former Associate Professor of biology at the MIT Center for Cancer Research.After investigating for a year,MIT fired Van Parijs for research misconduct:fabricating and falsifying research data in a paper,several unpublished manuscripts,and grant applications.,In March 2011,Van Parijs pleaded guilty in a U.S.District Court in Boston to one count of making a false statement on a federal grant application.The government asked Judge Denise Casper for a 6-month jail term because of the seriousness of the fraud,which involved a$2-million grant.,After several prominent scientists including Van Parijs former post-doc supervisor pleading for clemency on his behalf,on 13 June,Van Parijs was finally sentenced six months of home detention with electronic monitoring,plus 400 hours of community service and a payment to MIT of$61,117-restitution for the already-spent grant money that MIT had to return to the National Institutes of Health,Van Parijs area of research was in the use of siRNA in studying disease mechanism,expecially in autoimmune diseases.He was studying normal immune cell function and defects in these cells during disease development,Van Parijs was first accused of misconduct in 2004.Van Parijs had apparently attributed results presented at an MIT symposium to two postdocs who had not obtained them.When four postdocs and a graduate student challenged Van Parijs,he was unable to explain why hed made the claims,so they notified MIT.,In response to these allegations,the MIT closed Van Parijss lab,terminated relevant grants and stopped the submission of papers.Finally,in October 2005,the university,fired him.,For instance,Van Parijs and others published images in the,Journal of Immunology,in which they represented the results of a test for the proteins,Bcl-2 and-actin,5.Van Parijs then used the same images in a paper published by,Immunity,4,but saying that they came from tests for different proteins,Ras and Ras-GTP.,Van Parijs,case cont.,Requirements for making a finding of research misconduct,42 CFR 93.104,There be a significant departure from accepted practices of the relevant research community;,The misconduct be committed intentionally,knowingly,or recklessly;and,The allegation be proven by a preponderance of the evidence.,NOTE:The Regulation imposes a 6-year time limitation for occurrences of research misconduct to be brought to the attention of an institution or the Department of Health and Human Services(HHS)(see 93.105),NIH,是如何处理misconduct 的,nexus.od.nih.gov/all/2012/03/16/nih-and-research-misconduct/,NIH Process for Handling Research Misconduct Allegations,What happens if there is a finding of research misconduct?,If an individual involved in NIH funded research is found to have committed research misconduct,the administrative actions PHS/HHS may take against them include,but are not limited to:,终止接受联邦科研和协议资助的合法性,禁止参加,PHS,有关的委员会，评审组的一切活动。,certification of information sources by the respondent that is forwarded by the institution,certification of data by the institution,imposition of supervision on the respondent by the institution,submission of a correction of published articles by the respondent,and,submission of a retraction of published articles by the respondent.,进一步措施,此外，,NIH,或将采取进一步行政惩处措施，包括：,调整资助年限或取消已批准的,PI,或其他关键团队成员。,暂停或终止已发放的资助。,追回已用资助。,对暂停的资助的处理,研究机构的处罚,研究单位如大学可能采取进一步惩罚措施,:,Loss of employment,解职,Reassignment of personnel,调换工作,Mentorship program,教育,Appeal,（上诉）,Is there an appeals process?,Yes.The process for contesting a decision is outlined in,42 CFR Part 93,Subpart E(PDF-52 KB).For more on appeals,please see the,Hearings page on the ORI Web site.,案例,grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-13-014.html,国外院校的研究生培养,学生来源：科研背景，人生目的；,招生要求：成绩，科研经验，其它个人能力（团队精神，交流，品行，等）,对国外招生的条件：科研背景，研究经历包括文章及实验室背景，与诚信相关。,硕士与博士,研究生的课程及文献学习,实验室轮转：,3,个目的,-,认识实验室运作，认识老师的科研及,mentorship,，人脉；,毕业要求：,CNUP Center for neuroscience at U.Pittsburgh,PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS,RESEARCH,Students start research in a laboratory they select immediately upon entering the program.,Students gain experience in at least two laboratories,through rotations during the first year.,Students choose a doctoral advisor no later than the end of August of the first year.,COURSEWORK,A sequence of three core courses that are typically completed in the first year(32 credit):,Cellular and Molecular Neurobiology I(7 credit),Cellular and Molecular Neurobiology II(7 credit),Systems Neurobiology,23 elective courses(9 credit,there are many from which to choose),CNUP program,PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS,Course work(cont.),A statistics course and an ethics course(1 credit),Proseminar in Year 1(informal weekly presentations by faculty of ongoing research).,A Grant Writing course(2 credit).,Research seminar(regular attendance is required throughout graduate training).,Journal Club(regular attendance at a broad-based student-run journal club is required until students have advanced to candidacy).,TEACHING,In general,second-year students serve as teaching assistants to members of the training faculty for a one-term course.,MILESTONES,Preliminary exam(referred to as the reprint exam,this exam is taken at the end of the first year and tests the students ability to orally present and critically evaluate a published research report).,Comprehensive exam(this exam takes the format of a grant application).,Doctoral dissertation and defense.,STUDENT EVALUATIONS,Annual evaluation by the CNUP Student Evaluations Committee(also mid-year evaluation of first-year students).,Second year research evaluation.,OVERALL OBJECTIVES OF THE GRADUATE PROGRAM,To develop competence in conducting laboratory research;to plan,execute,report,and defend original research in the field of neuroscience.,To develop general excellence in neuroscience and specific expertise in one or more areas of neuroscience such as cognitive neuroscience,，,molecular neurobiology,neuro-anatomy,neurochemistry,。,To develop a general professional excellence in oral and written expression,in the critical analysis of primary scientific articles,and in teaching.,To develop fundamental skills in scientific reasoning required to define research questions and devise innovative strategies as a means for adapting to the continually evolving landscape of neuroscience and neuroscience research.,Principles for training faculty,First,the program should aid each student in the development of an individualized training program based on the students background and interests.,Second,research experience should form the core of each students training and as such should not be postponed by a lengthy period of time devoted exclusively to course work.,Third,students should be able to complete the program in four to six years.,Fourth,students should be evaluated in terms of those competencies that are important to a research scientist:designing,conducting and evaluating research,both their own and that of others.Thus,the progress that a student makes in the program is considered primarily in terms of the students performance as an investigator.,Doctoral Dissertation,The dissertation is the culmination of graduate study.The dissertation is intended to embody an extended original investigation of a problem of significance in the field of neuroscience.It must add to the general store of knowledge and to understanding in this field.It must also serve to demonstrate each of the competencies described at the outset of these guidelines.,www.medschool.pitt.edu/research/index.aspx,中国医学研究的几个误区,管理体系的执行,管理者的急功近利,对科学过程的理解,对科学研究成果的评判,对科学家的管理和评价,科研成果的量化，科教杂志的排名指标，及误用,