Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The history and future of the office of research integrity: Scientific misconduct and beyond

  • Published:
Science and Engineering Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper looks at the issues and controversies that led to creation of the Office of Research Integrity (ORI) and that dominated its agenda in the early years. The successes and failures of ORI are described and new problems identified. This paper then looks ahead to the future, considering what issues will dominate ORI’s agenda and affect the research institutions, individual scientists, and the scientific community in the next several years.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Statement of Organization, Functions, and Delegations of Authority; Office of the Assistant Secretary for Health, 57 Fed. Reg. 24262 (1992), revised 59 Fed. Reg. 2856 (1994).

  2. Fraud in Biomedical Research: Hearings Before the Subcommittee on Investigations and Oversight of the House Committee on Science, 97th Cong., 1st Sess. 2 (1981).

  3. Brandt, E.N. (1983) PHS perspectives on misconduct in science. Public Health Reports 93:136–140.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Section 493 of the Public Health Service Act, 42 U.S.C. §289b, as enacted by Public Law 99-158 (Nov. 20, 1985).

  5. “Responsibilities of Awardee and Applicant Institutions for Dealing With and Reporting Possible Misconduct in Science,” 42 C.F.R. Part 50, Subpart A, 54 Fed. Reg. 32446 (August 8, 1989).

  6. 42 C.F.R. §50.102.

  7. Section 493 of the PHS Act, 42 U.S.C §289b, as amended by the National Institutes of Health Revitalization Act of 1993, Public Law 103-43 (June 10, 1993).

  8. “Health Research Misconduct: HHS’ Handling of Cases Is Appropriate, but Timeliness Remains a Concern,” at 6–7, GAO/HEHS-95-134 (August 1995).

  9. Notice, 57 Fed. Reg. 53125 (Nov. 6, 1992).

  10. ORI Newsletter 1(4):8 (Sept. 1993).

  11. Notice, 58 Fed. Reg. 33831 (Langlois) (June 21, 1993).

  12. Notice, 58 Fed. Reg. 33832 (Stricker) (June 21, 1993).

  13. DAB legal ruling in Re: Rameshwar K. Sharma, Ph.D. (May 10, 1993) (unpublished).

  14. Anderson, C. (1994) The aftermath of the Gallo case. Science 263: 20–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. DAB Decision No. 1431 (1993).

  16. DAB Decision No. 1446 (1993).

  17. Notices, 58 Fed. Reg. 33830 (Freisheim) (June 21, 1993); 59 Fed. Reg. 18539 (Hiserodt) (April 19, 1994).

  18. ORI Newsletter 4(1):1 (Dec. 1995); Walker, P. Federal research-integrity office quickens pace of investigations. Chronicle of Higher Education: A32, 33 (April 11, 1997).

  19. ORI Model Policies and Procedures for Responding to Allegations of Scientific Misconduct (April 1995).

  20. Report of the Commission on Research Integrity: Integrity and Misconduct in Research (1995). The report is available on ORI’s home page at http://ori.dhhs.gov or from ORI upon request.

  21. Implementation Proposals on Recommendations by the Commission on Research Integrity (June 14, 1996), HHS, Washington, D.C.

  22. 42 C.F.R. 50.103(d)(13).

  23. Guidelines for Institutions and Whistleblowers: Responding to Possible Retaliation Against Whistleblowers in Extramural Research (November 1995), ORI, Rockville, MD.

  24. ORI Annual Report: 1996, at 38–43 (November 1997).

  25. Dresser, R. (1997) Giving scientists their due: the Imanishi-Kari decision. Hastings Center Report 26–28 (May–June).

  26. DAB Decision No. 1582 (1996).

  27. ORI Newsletter 5(1): 6 (Dec. 1996).

  28. Angelides v. Baylor College of Medicine, et al, No. 95-24248 (11th D.C. Harris County, Texas, Aug. 29, 1995).

  29. Angelides v. Baylor College of Medicine, 117 F. 3rd 830 (5th Cir. 1997).

  30. DAB Decision No. 1677 (1999). The decision is available on the ORI web site at 〈http://ori.dhhs.gov〉.

  31. Kaiser, J. (1999) Baylor saga comes to an end. Science 283: 1091.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. ORI Newsletter 2 (4):1–2 (Sept. 1994); 59 Fed. Reg. 63811 (Dec. 9, 1994).

  33. See note [a], p. 184.

  34. National Academy of Sciences (1992) Responsible Science: Ensuring the Integrity of the Research Process, Vol. I, National Academy Press, Washington, D.C.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Semiannual Report to Congress, Office of Inspector General, National Science Foundation, 16:46–48 (October 1996–Mar. 1997).

  36. Dustira, A.K. (1996) The Federal role in influencing research ethics education and standards in science. Professional Ethics 5:139–156.

    Google Scholar 

  37. “Managing Integrity in Research,” a summary of a conference co-sponsored by ORI and the University of Michigan (ORI, March 12, 1998).

  38. ORI Newsletter 6(1):1–2,7 (Dec. 1997).

  39. Gunsalus, C.K. (1998) Preventing the need for whistleblowing: practical advice for university administrators. Science and Engineering Ethics 4: 75–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Research Triangle Institute (1995) Consequences of Whistleblowing for the Whistleblower in Misconduct in Science Cases. Submitted to the Office of Research Integrity, and (1996) Survey of Accused but Exonerated Individuals in Research Misconduct Cases. Submitted to the Office of Research Integrity. See 〈http://ori.dhhs.gov〉.

  41. ORI Biennial Report: 1991–92, p. 3, Table 1 (Sept. 1993); ORI Annual Report: 1996, p. 3, Table 2 (Nov. 1997).

  42. The Internet address for the PHS Administrative Actions Bulletin Board is 〈http://silk.nih.gov/public/cbzlbje.@www.orilist.html〉.

  43. ORI Newsletter 5 (1): 6 (Dec. 1996).

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Office of Research Integrity, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 5515 Security Lane, Suite 700, 20852, Rockville, Maryland, USA

    Chris B. Pascal (Acting Director)

Authors
  1. Chris B. Pascal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

The opinions expressed herein are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of the Office of Research Integrity, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, or any other federal agency. Decisions on pending policy and regulatory matters may affect issues addressed in this paper.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Pascal, C.B. The history and future of the office of research integrity: Scientific misconduct and beyond. SCI ENG ETHICS 5, 183–198 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-999-0008-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-999-0008-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation