Research integrity evolved from a trending topic to a comprehensive and robust scientific discipline. But what exactly are we talking about? What is the concept of research integrity and what does it look like in everyday practice?  

Aurélie Crabbé, Assistant professor at the Laboratory of Pharmaceutical Microbiology, Ghent University, Belgium and Kris Dierickx, Full professor of medical ethics at the Faculty of Medicine and a member of the Interfaculty Centre for Biomedical Ethics and Law, part of the Department of Public Health and Primary Care, KU Leuven, Belgium, talk about the many aspects of research integrity and the challenges of translating a theoretical framework into everyday research practice.  

In this episode, we cover:

• What is research integrity (three levels of research integrity)?
• Why is research integrity important?
• How research integrity affects society
• Is research integrity a new phenomenon?
• How to combine the pressure in academia with research integrity?
• How to stay on the right path forward?
• The responsibility of PI’s

----------------------------------------------------------------

This podcast series complements the online training tool 'Mind the GAP, training on Good Academic Practices'. Mind the GAP is an English-language training tool for all researchers and those involved in research, from PhD students to more experienced researchers, to teachers and policy makers.  

If you are affiliated with a Flemish university you can find the tool on your institution’s educational platform: 

Ghent University: Ufora  

KU Leuven: Toledo  

University of Antwerp: Blackboard 

Hasselt University: Blackboard  

Vrije Universiteit Brussel: Canvas 

Not part of the above institutions? Go to https://mindthegap.vlir.be/ and follow the international version of the tool (condensed version).   

The Mind the GAP Podcast was jointly developed by VLIR (Flemish Interuniversity Council – Filip Colson) and the five Flemish universities (Ghent University – Stefanie Van der Burght; KU Leuven – Wouter Vandevelde; University of Antwerp – Marianne De Voecht; Hasselt University – Stephanie Ruysschaert; Vrije Universiteit Brussel – Klara Swalus) and was financed by the Flemish government. It was produced by podcast agency De Praeters and hosted by Elisa Nelissen (KU Leuven). 

Connect with us: https://mindthegap.vlir.be/

----------------------------------------------------------------

Resources Mentioned 

• Wakefield, A. J. et al. (1998). Ileal-lymphoid-nodular hyperplasia, non-specific colitis, and pervasive developmental disorder in children. Lancet, 351(9103):637-41. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(97)11096-0.
• Rao T.S., Andrade C. (2011). The MMR vaccine and autism: Sensation, refutation, retraction, and fraud. Indian J Psychiatry. 53(2):95-6. doi: 10.4103/0019-5545.82529. PMID: 21772639;PMCID: PMC3136032.
• Elisabeth Bik. Science Integrity Digest – A blog about science integrity. https://scienceintegritydigest.com/
• ALLEA (2023). The European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity: Revised Edition 2023. Berlin. DOI 10.26356/ECOC    
• Vlaamse Commissie voor Wetenschappelijke Integriteit (VCWI) (Flemish Commission for Scientific Integrity). https://vcwi.be/
• World Health Organisation (WHO). (31/07/2023). Factsheet Tobacco. Retrieved July 15, 2024 from https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/tobacco.

Key Takeaways

• Research integrity is a hard concept to define. It can have many meanings, at least three: on the individual (moral character), on the research process (method, design, …) and on an institutional level (funders, journals, …).
• The importance of research integrity relates to the basis of research: we build upon previous knowledge therefore it is important to start with high quality results. It’s a matter of trust.
• The impact of breaches of research integrity is case-specific: in some cases the effect is clear (and impactful) e.g. clinical trial research on patients, but even cases with ‘minor’ consequences can still have an effect e.g. loss of research time, money.
• Research integrity isn’t a new topic but current context has an impact (increase of the courage to report, knowledge on the topic, pressure/competition, limited risk to be caught, …).
• To be able to combine working with research integrity with the current pressures, structural changes have to be made, e.g. focus on quality instead of quantity in research(er) evaluation is one such small step.
• It’s a big challenge for researchers to deal with issues of research integrity but discussing the issues is worth it: there’s always a solution.
• Research integrity is a shared responsibility for all those involved (junior, supervisors, institution, doctoral schools unit, …). Institutions have a crucial role in creating a safe environment and in enhancing research skills (training, support, …).
• A safe environment and an open research climate in which issues can be debated, are important preconditions for a research climate with integrity.
• (Working with) research integrity is team work as is science (‘team science’).
• With a view to reproducibility, both for yourself and for colleagues, it is important to accurately write down all steps relating to the (processing of the) data.
• (Early on) training is crucial (provide it – attend it – value it, throughout your career).
• Talk to your supervisor (or someone in your professional environment) if you have any doubts.