by Margaret Munro
Some of Canada’s top brain specialists have apparently been duped by shady operators in China.
The
Canadian doctors approved and recently published a scientific report on
Alzheimer’s disease that came from a “flourishing” academic black
market in China, according to a report released Thursday.
“China’s
publication bazaar,” as it is described, allows unscrupulous scientists
to pay big money — up to $26,300 — to become authors of scientific
papers they didn’t write.
They don’t do any experiments or research either, according to the report in the U.S. journal Science that adds a creative, if disturbing, twist to research misconduct.
“It’s
new to me,” says Dr. Robert Chen, at the University of Toronto, who is
now investigating the origins of the suspect Alzheimer’s report.
It
surfaced last year in China’s “flourishing academic black market
involving shady agencies, corrupt scientists and compromised editors —
many of them operating in plain view,” according to Science. It says
that several scientific papers advertised under “authorship for sale” by
Chinese brokers and editing shops have later appeared in established
journals — including the Alzheimer’s report published this year in the Canadian Journal of Neurological Sciences.
The
“internationally recognized” peer-reviewed publication is published by
the Canadian Neurological Sciences Federation and edited by some of the
Canada’s leading brain and neurology researchers. The suspect paper was
submitted last November, reviewed by Canadian neuroscientists and
accepted and published as an “original article.”
Chen, a U of T
medical professor and brain-imaging specialist who became
editor-in-chief of the journal in July, has asked the Chinese authors
to clarify their contributions. He says he’s “suspicious,” but says he
wants to give the Chinese authors a chance to respond.
Chen says
the scientific information in the report appears to be valid. “The issue
is the authors, did they actually do the work,” he says.
The
report, about a gene associated with Alzheimer’s disease, lists eight
Chinese co-authors from Shandong University. In a lengthy email to
Postmedia News this week, lead author JianZhong Bi adamantly denies any
wrongdoing. “Neither I nor other authors paid to add our names as
authors on the paper,” Bi says.
A team at Science says it first
spotted the Alzheimer’s report in August 2012. It says it was one of 12
papers advertised under “authorship for sale” by Core Editing, one of
several blogs offering academic services in China.
As part of an
investigation into “paper selling,” contributing editor Mara Hvistendahl
and her team posed as graduate students and scientists. They approached
27 Chinese editing companies about purchasing authorship of a
scientific paper or paying the company to write a paper for them. Only
five of the companies refused, says the team, which found “authorship
fees” ranging from $1,600 to $26,300.
The black market offers not
only “an author’s slot” on papers written by other scientists, “but also
self-plagiarizing by translating a paper already published in Chinese
and resubmitting it in English; hiring a ghostwriter to compose a paper
from faked or independently gathered data; or simply buying a paper from
an online catalogue of manuscripts — often with a guarantee of
publication,” the team says.
Academic publishing is big business
and a big preoccupation for academics around the world, who churn out
papers and research reports for publication in thousands of journals.
The number of papers from China has soared from 41,417 in 2002 to
193,733 in 2012, making it second in volume to the United States.
Publishing
in journals — especially those with international credibility — is
often key to academic promotion and is seen as critical in China.
“People
are sparing no expense in order to get published in international
journals,” Fan Dongsheng, a neurologist and former vice-president of
Peking University Third Hospital, told Science.
Wei Yang,
president of the National Natural Science Foundation of China, writes in
an editorial accompanying the Science report that “an unhealthy
research environment in China” is being driven by several factors,
including competitive grants and measuring merit on quantity of work.
This “can lure young scientists to climb the academic ladder by stepping
outside ethical boundaries,” Yang says.
Toronto’s Chen, who has
studied in Hong Kong, the U.K, and the U.S., says he and his colleagues
had never heard of paper selling until alerted by Science. And he and a
leading Canadian publishing expert say the revelations add a new
dimension to academic misconduct.
“Wow, this is new to me,” Michel
Duquet, president elect of the Canadian Association of Learned
Journals, said in an interview. The association represents almost 100
academic journals from the Canadian Medical Association Journal to the Journal of Religion and Popular Culture.
“I
am amazed that any author would add a name for any amount of money
because it affects their reputation in the long run,” Duquet said.
While
the focus may be on China this week there has long been concern about
research misconduct in other countries. Revelations that pharmaceutical
companies were “ghostwriting” papers for doctors has prompted leading
medical journals to require authors to detail their involvement in the
research when submitting papers. Chen says his journal might follow
their lead.
And earlier this year it was revealed that more than
100 scientific journals accepted a bogus, error-filled cancer study for
publication in a sting organized by John Bohannon,
a science journalist at Harvard University. Bohannon shopped the fake
study around to reveal what he called the “Wild West” of pay-to-publish
outlets.
Duquet also points to problems with the proliferation of
online journals. “Some journals, as long as they have the money they
could care less about what is published in their journals,” he says.
Source: PostMedia News
No comments:
Post a Comment
Add a comment