Cited by 26Academic integrity and plagiarismPharmaceutical industry and healthcareAcademic Publishing and Open Access

A consensus statement on research misconduct in the UK

British Medical Journal Publishing Group·2012·BMJ

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/bmj.e1111

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
British Medical Journal Publishing Group
Corresponding author
British Medical Journal Publishing Group
Venue
BMJ
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2012-02-16
Volume
344
Issue
feb16 2
Pages
e1111-e1111
ISSN
  • 0007-1447 (ISSN-L)
  • 0959-8138
  • 1468-5833
OpenAlex
W4241655044
Cited by
26
References
0
Citations by year
2024: 2 · 2022: 3 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 8
FWCI
11.64
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • BMJ (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Academic integrity and plagiarism
  • Life Sciences › Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics › Pharmacology › Pharmaceutical industry and healthcare
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Academic Publishing and Open Access
Keywords
research misconduct, research integrity, research ethics
MeSH terms
United Kingdom, Publishing, Research Support as Topic, Scientific Misconduct, Codes of Ethics

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review