title: What can we learn from the Hwang and Sudbø affairs?
abstract: The recent publication, in prestigious scientific journals, of two major studies that were subsequently shown to contain fabricated data may compel reviewers and editors to adopt a more rigorous policy in accepting articles for publication. The current manner of peer reviewing research articles provides no assurance that the proffered work is not the result of fraud. The present guidelines for contributors in large team investigations may need to be updated to avoid giving credit to co-authors who may have made little, if any, contribution to the work.
authors.affiliation: Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia. p.gerber@bigpond.net.au
authors.forename: Paul
authors.initials: P
authors.lastname: Gerber
mesh_terms: D001315:Australia; D001364:Awareness; D035081:Editorial Policies; D007722:Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice; D006801:Humans; D007723:Korea; D009664:Norway; D010506:Periodicals as Topic / Q000592:standards; D012106:Research / Q000592:standards; D015871:Scientific Misconduct; D012941:Social Responsibility