Research integrity in times of pandemic
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
In 1994, Douglas Graham Altman, one of the greatest statisticians of all time, wrote "We need less research, better research, and research done for good reasons". Twenty-seven years ago, Altman pointed out that the system favored unscientific behavior and that "bad science" was easy to publish, highlighting the financial implications of this amount of poorly designed research, with erroneous statistical methods, unrepresentative samples, or fraud. The covid-19 pandemic has once again put clinical research in check. The pressure for urgent responses was unprecedented. Knowledge of the origin of the virus, the transmission dynamics, the pathophysiology of the disease, efficient pharmacological and non-pharmacological measures would be counted in lives - and economies, and in governments.
Article Details
Authors maintain copyright and grant the HSJ the right to first publication. From 2024, the publications wiil be licensed under Attribution 4.0 International 
, allowing their sharing, recognizing the authorship and initial publication in this journal.
Authors are authorized to assume additional contracts separately for the non-exclusive distribution of the version of the work published in this journal (e.g., publishing in an institutional repository or as a book chapter), with acknowledgment of authorship and initial publication in this journal.
Authors are encouraged to publish and distribute their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their personal page) at any point after the editorial process.
Also, the AUTHOR is informed and consents that the HSJ can incorporate his article into existing or future scientific databases and indexers, under the conditions defined by the latter at all times, which will involve, at least, the possibility that the holders of these databases can perform the following actions on the article.
References
Altman DG. The scandal of poor medical research. BMJ. 1994;308:283. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.308.6924.283 PMid:8124111 PMCid:PMC2539276 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.308.6924.283
Takagi H. COVID‐19 pandemic and medical publication. Eur J Clin Invest. 2020;50(11):e13394. https://doi.org/10.1111/eci.13394 PMid:32886801 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/eci.13394
Bagdasarian N, Cross GB, Fisher D. Rapid publications risk the integrity of science in the era of COVID-19. BMC Med. 2020;18(1):192. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-020-01650-6 PMid:32586327 PMCid:PMC7315694 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-020-01650-6
Elgendy IY, Nimri N, Barakat AF, Ibrahim J, Mandrola J, Foy A. A systematic bias assessment of top-cited full-length original clinical investigations related to COVID-19. Eur J Intern Med. 2021;86:104-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejim.2021.01.018 PMid:33541829 PMCid:PMC7826014 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejim.2021.01.018
Watch R. Retracted coronavirus (COVID-19) papers [Internet]. 2021 [cited 2021 Sep 28]. Available from: https://retractionwatch.com/retracted-coronavirus-covid-19-papers/
Anderson C, Nugent K, Peterson C. Academic Journal Retractions and the COVID-19 Pandemic. J Prim Care Community Heal. 2021;12:215013272110155. https://doi.org/10.1177/21501327211015592 PMid:33949228 PMCid:PMC8114243 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/21501327211015592
Dadalto L, Royo MM, Costa BS. Bioética e integridade científica nas pesquisas clínicas sobre covid-19. Revista Bioética. 2020;28(3):418-25. https://doi.org/10.1590/1983-80422020283402 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/1983-80422020283402
Alves CPL, Segundo JDB, Costa GG, Pereira-Cenci T, Lima KC, Demarco FF, et al. How a few poorly designed COVID-19 studies may have contributed to misinformation in Brazil: the case for evidence-based communication of science. BMJ Open Sci. 2021;5(1):e100202. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjos-2021-100202 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjos-2021-100202
Oreskes N. Why Bad Science Is Sometimes More Appealing Than Good Science [Internet]. 2021 [cited 2021 Sep 29]. Available from: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/why-bad-science-is-sometimes-more-appealing-than-good-science/
Allen RM. When peril responds to plague: predatory journal engagement with COVID-19. Libr Hi Tech. 2021;39(3):746-60. https://doi.org/10.1108/LHT-01-2021-0011 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/LHT-01-2021-0011
Dinis-Oliveira RJ. COVID-19 research: pandemic versus "paperdemic", integrity, values and risks of the "speed science." Forensic Sci Res. 2020;5(2):1-14. https://doi.org/10.1080/20961790.2020.1767754 PMid:32939434 PMCid:PMC7476615 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/20961790.2020.1767754
Calster BV, Wynants L, Riley RD, Smeden M van, Collins GS. Methodology over metrics: Current scientific standards are a disservice to patients and society. J Clin Epidemiol. 2021; S0895-4356(21)00170-0. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2021.05.018 PMid:34077797 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2021.05.018
Mehra MR, Ruschitzka F, Patel AN. Retraction-Hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine with or without a macrolide for treatment of COVID-19: a multinational registry analysis. Lancet. 2020;395(10240):1820. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(20)31324-6 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(20)31324-6
Neto JG, Antonio ACP, Tessler L. Integridade em pesquisa clínica: o caso da proxalutamida [Internet]. 2021 [cited 2021 Sep 29]. Available from: http://revistaquestaodeciencia.com.br/artigo/2021/08/10/integridade-em-pesquisa-clinica-o-caso-da-proxalutamida