How do authors of systematic reviews deal with research malpractice and misconduct in original studies? A cross-sectional analysis of systematic reviews and survey of their authors

Browse by...

Deposit

Highlights

More informations

Title		How do authors of systematic reviews deal with research malpractice and misconduct in original studies? A cross-sectional analysis of systematic reviews and survey of their authors
Authors		Elia, Nadia Von Elm, Erik Bjorn Chatagner, Alexandra Pöpping, Daniel M Tramer, Martin
Published in		BMJ open. 2016, vol. 6, no. 3, e010442
Abstract		To study whether systematic reviewers apply procedures to counter-balance some common forms of research malpractice such as not publishing completed research, duplicate publications, or selective reporting of outcomes, and to see whether they identify and report misconduct.
Keywords		Systematic review — Research misconduct
Identifiers		DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2015-010442 PMID: 26936908
Full text		Article (Published version) (1.1 MB) - Free access
Structures		Faculté de médecine / Section de médecine clinique / Département de santé et médecine communautaires / Institut de santé globale
Research group		La médecine périopératoire et l'anesthésie (70)
Citation (ISO format)		ELIA, Nadia et al. How do authors of systematic reviews deal with research malpractice and misconduct in original studies? A cross-sectional analysis of systematic reviews and survey of their authors. In: BMJ Open, 2016, vol. 6, n° 3, p. e010442. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2015-010442 https://archive-ouverte.unige.ch/unige:86858

483 hits

232 downloads

Deposited on : 2016-09-07

Export document

Archive ouverte UNIGE