Data deposition as a measure to prevent and to detect scientific misconduct CERN workshop on...

Data deposition as a measure to prevent and to detect scientific misconduct

CERN workshop on Innovations in Scholarly Communication (OAI6)Geneva, June 17 – 19, 2009

Alexander LerchlSchool of Engineering and Science

Jacobs University Bremena.lerchl@jacobs-university.de

The REFLEX Project

• Funded by the European Commission

• 2000 – 2004, ~ 3 M€ budget

• 12 research groups from 7 European countries

• Coordinator: Franz Adlkofer, Munich (Verum Foundation)

• 8 Publications from Austria (Medical University Vienna)

The First Case: Diem et al., 2005

Huge Effects on DNA Molecules andExtremely Low Standard Deviations

A Letter-to-the-Editor, Vijayalaxmi et al., 2006

...

The Reply: Rüdiger et al., 2006

Original data!

n = 2 for all means!

Last digit preference!

Out of 48 last digits:2: 14 times5: 2 timesp<0.001

Variations lower

than theoretical

limits!

24 average valueseach: n=2

Coefficients of variation always lower than 5%.

Accuracy of the method ~ 25%!

What did Mutation Research do?

• Nothing.

Onlin

e Feb

ruar

y 20

08

The Second Case: Schwarz et al., 2008

Again: Huge Effects and Negligible Standard Deviations

Coefficients of Variation

• Sham exposed: 3.9%

• Negative controls: 4.1%

• Exposed: 2.6%(at 25% variations of the SAR values!!)

• Positive controls: 1.2%

Please keep in mind: n=3!

Two Fortunate Coincidences

1) The discovery of Christian Wolf

2) The discovery of a student

The Discovery of Wolf: How to Unblind the Exposure System

The Discovery of the Student: Hidden Data

The student: „Just do a right-click on the graph, and open the Excel sheet. The original data are then visible“.

So I did ....

n = 12, and not n = 3 !

So, n = 12, and not n = 3!

Calculated “Raw“ Data

What did Int Arch Occup Health do?

• (Almost) Nothing.

Reactions of the Medical University Vienna

• In three press releases, the University called the data “fabricated“

• They informed the journals accordingly

Outlook

• None of the papers in question (altogether eight) has been retracted (so far).

• For example:

Outlook

• COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) is currently considering a complaint against the journals [Mutation Research and IAEOH] to investigate whether they followed COPE's recommended procedures.

Conclusions

• These cases highlight the need for deposition of original data when a manuscript is submitted in order to make investigations possible if suspicions about the scientific integrity of submitted or published articles arise. This is of particular importance for papers dealing with topics of potential public concerns.

Thank you for Your Attention!

Questions?