| 临床医学研究论文中常见的真实性学术不端问题及其对策 |
| |
| 引用本文： | 郭盛楠,齐淑兰,王晓红,杨立丽,朱琦,孟醒.临床医学研究论文中常见的真实性学术不端问题及其对策[J].编辑学报,2018,30(2):174-177. |
| |
| 作者姓名： | 郭盛楠 齐淑兰 王晓红 杨立丽 朱琦 孟醒 |
| |
| 作者单位： | 中国中医科学院针灸研究所期刊中心,100700,北京;中国中医科学院针灸研究所期刊中心,100700,北京;中国中医科学院针灸研究所期刊中心,100700,北京;中国中医科学院针灸研究所期刊中心,100700,北京;中国中医科学院针灸研究所期刊中心,100700,北京;中国中医科学院针灸研究所期刊中心,100700,北京 |
| |
| 基金项目： | 中国科学技术期刊编辑学会基金项目(2017QNB11)，中央级公益性科研院所基本科研业务费专项资金资助(ZZ16008) |
| |
| 摘 要： | 临床医学研究论文中常见的真实性学术不端问题常存在于受试者、干预措施、疗效指标、统计学处理和研究方案这几个方面.编辑可以通过向作者索要原始数据; 从文章整体及宏观的角度入手,注意写作的严谨性和逻辑的缜密性; 重视同行评议专家意见,必要时可请多位专家对论文进行评审; 核查投稿系统中作者的基本信息等方式协助判断研究的真实性.若遇到涉及真实性的学术不端问题,可参考出版伦理委员会中的具体流程处理.
|
| 关 键 词： | 临床研究 真实性 学术不端 对策 |
Academic misconduct about the facticity in the medical clinical research articles and the countermeasures |
| |
| GUO Shengnan,QI Shulan,WANG Xiaohong,YANG Lili,ZHU Qi and MENG Xing.Academic misconduct about the facticity in the medical clinical research articles and the countermeasures[J].Acta Editologica,2018,30(2):174-177. |
| |
| Authors: | GUO Shengnan QI Shulan WANG Xiaohong YANG Lili ZHU Qi and MENG Xing |
| |
| Institution: | Journal Center, No.1;6.Nanxiaojie, Dongzhimen Nei, 100700, Beijing, China,Journal Center, No.1;6.Nanxiaojie, Dongzhimen Nei, 100700, Beijing, China,Journal Center, No.1;6.Nanxiaojie, Dongzhimen Nei, 100700, Beijing, China,Journal Center, No.1;6.Nanxiaojie, Dongzhimen Nei, 100700, Beijing, China,Journal Center, No.1;6.Nanxiaojie, Dongzhimen Nei, 100700, Beijing, China and Journal Center, No.1;6.Nanxiaojie, Dongzhimen Nei, 100700, Beijing, China |
| |
| Abstract: | In the medical clinical research articles,the academic misconduct about the facticity may appear in participants, interventions,outcomes,statistics and the study schemes. Editors can evaluate the facticity of the studies through the following ways: asking raw data from the authors; paying attention to the preciseness and the logic from the whole article and the general idea; focusing on the peer reviews and invite a number of the experts to evaluate; and checking the basic information from the submission system. We can consult to the Committee on Publication Ethics if we meet the problems related to the academic misconduct about the facticity. |
| |
| Keywords: | clinical research facticity academic misconduct countermeasure |
| 本文献已被 万方数据 等数据库收录！ |
| 点击此处可从《编辑学报》浏览原始摘要信息 |
| 点击此处可从《编辑学报》下载免费的PDF全文 |
|
