Skip to main content

Home/ Medicine & Healthcare/ Group items tagged bioethics

Rss Feed Group items tagged

avivajazz  jazzaviva

Bad practices of biomedical researchers and publishers - 0 views

  •  
    Gaceta Sanitaria Vol.21 Núm. 06. Gaceta Sanitaria. ISSN:0213-9111 | Free full text (English)
avivajazz  jazzaviva

Clinical trials: what are the ethics of interpreting + communicating trial results? htt... - 0 views

  •  
    Ethical Considerations in the Interpretation and Communication of Clinical Trial Results -- Coultas 4 (2): 194 -- Proceedings of the American Thoracic Society
avivajazz  jazzaviva

How many scientists fabricate and falsify research? [PLoS One. 2009] - 1 views

  •  
    The frequency with which scientists fabricate and falsify data, or commit other forms of scientific misconduct is a matter of controversy... Misconduct was reported more frequently by medical/pharmacological researchers than others...This metareview is a conservative estimate of the true prevalence of scientific misconduct.
avivajazz  jazzaviva

What is the future of peer review? | Full Text | Vasc Health Risk Manag. 2007 February;... - 0 views

  •  
    What is the future of peer review? Why is there fraud in science? Is plagiarism out of control? Why do scientists do bad things? Is it all a case of:"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing?"
avivajazz  jazzaviva

Key opinion leaders: independent experts or drug representatives in disguise? - 0 views

  •  
    In the world of medicine, "key opinion leader" is the somewhat Orwellian term used to describe the senior doctors who help drug companies sell drugs. : BMJ : British Medical Journal
avivajazz  jazzaviva

Conflict of Interest in Medical Research, Education, and Practice | Institute of Medici... - 1 views

  •  
    Downloadable slideshows from this November 2007 conference. For report PDFs: (1) http://is.gd/3AoNu (2) http://is.gd/3AoXG
avivajazz  jazzaviva

Merck: A Case of Deadly Marketing // Killing People? Yes! - 0 views

  •  
    The Scientist published that "Merck paid an undisclosed sum to Elsevier to produce several volumes of a publication that had the look of a peer-reviewed medical journal, but contained only reprinted or summarized articles--most of which presented data favorable to Merck products--that appeared to act solely as marketing tools with no disclosure of company sponsorship. "
1 - 20 of 24 Next ›
Showing 20 items per page