Retraction Watch

Tracking retractions as a window into the scientific process

Weekend reads: They committed misconduct, then earned $100 million in grants; collateral publishing damage

with 4 comments

The week at Retraction Watch featured a frank admission of error by a Nobel Prize winner, and a look at five “diseases” plaguing science. Here’s what was happening elsewhere:

Like Retraction Watch? Consider making a tax-deductible contribution to support our growth. You can also follow us on Twitter, like us on Facebook, add us to your RSS reader, sign up on our homepage for an email every time there’s a new post, or subscribe to our daily digest. Click here to review our Comments Policy. For a sneak peek at what we’re working on, click here.

Written by Ivan Oransky

February 25th, 2017 at 9:30 am

Posted in weekend reads

Comments
  • Alan R. Price February 26, 2017 at 1:31 pm

    The interesting Galbraith paper (Table 2) in tracking respondents from 1992 to 2016 with ORI findings/sanctions, as noted here, found later new NIH funding for 17 of 284 such respondents (including 3 who were postdocs and 12 who were faculty at the time of their research misconduct, which led to their Office of Research Integrity findings being published by name). The paper also states that 13 of the 284 continued to receive NIH funding for their ongoing grants.

    However, the paper does not describe any analysis as to how many, if any, of these 17 (or 13) respondents were debarred from Federal funding by ORI/HHS. The data in Table 1 indicate that 152 of the 284 tracked respondents were debarred (31 were postdocs and 52 were faculty).

    If the ORI did not impose debarment on the 17 respondents who later obtained new NIH funding (nor on the 13 respondents who continued to receive NIH funding for their ongoing grants), then there would be nothing particularly “surprising” about the conclusions in the paper [that the 17 (6%) had received a total of $101 million in support on 61 new projects].

  • Anonymous February 26, 2017 at 5:50 pm

    Amazing. The average PI in biomedical sciences is starving for grant funds, but the NIH is happy to give liars $5M+ on the average. Knowingly committing fraud should be a lifetime ban, always. There are too many good scientists struggling to do good work to let the liars have a second chance.

  • Keith February 27, 2017 at 6:41 am

    “They committed misconduct, then earned $100 million in grants: find out their ONE WEIRD TRICK!”
    -Buzzfeed

    • Anonymous February 27, 2017 at 4:51 pm

      Nice 🙂

  • Post a comment

    Threaded commenting powered by interconnect/it code.