Assessing institutional responsibility in scientific misconduct: A case study of enoximone research by Joachim Boldt

Abstract

All five publications analyzed remained active and warrant retraction to maintain the integrity of the scientific record. This analysis highlights the need for improved institutional supervision. The current guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics for retraction are inadequate for large-scale scientific misconduct. Comprehensive ethics training, regular audits, and transparent reporting are essential to ensure the credibility of published research.

Ähnliche Arbeiten