Research Integrity: Difference between revisions

'''''Accepted practices of the relevant research community means''''' those practices established by [https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-42/part-93 42 CFR part 93] and by PHS funding components or other funding agencies, as applicable, as well as commonly accepted professional codes or norms within the overarching community of researchers and institutions that apply for and receive federal awards.

'''''Research''''' means a systematic experiment, study, evaluation, demonstration, survey or other process of inquiry designed to generate new knowledge or to confirm, refine, or apply existing knowledge. It encompasses a broad range of disciplines, including but not limited to biomedical, clinical, translational, behavioral, educational, and social sciences, and may comprise many different approaches appropriate to the respective discipline. Research may involve observation, experimentation, analysis, evaluation, or synthesis, and is conducted with the goal of expanding scientific understanding, informing evidence-based practice, improving population-based outcomes, and/or contributing to the public good

Authorship or collaboration disputes and other matters that are not within the definition of research misconduct, as set forth in this policy, are not subject to this policy and shall be addressed through procedures outlined in the UNMC Faculty Handbook [<nowiki/>[[Faculty Handbook|Faculty]]], University of Nebraska Student Code of Conduct [https://catalog.unmc.edu/general-information/student-policies-procedures/code-of-conduct/code-of-conduct.pdf (https://catalog.unmc.edu/general-information/student-policies-procedures/code-of-conduct/code-of-conduct.pdf)] and University of Nebraska Medical Center Code of Conduct (<nowiki>https://catalog.unmc.edu/general-information/student-policies-procedures/unmc-code-of-conduct/</nowiki>), as appropriate.  Authorship guidelines are found at [https://wiki.unmc.edu/index.php/Authorship_Guidelines Authorship Guidelines - University of Nebraska Medical Center]

====Time for Completion ====

:(1) describe the nature of the allegation(s) of research misconduct, including identification of the respondent(s); (2) describe and document support for the research, including PHS or other funding agency support;  (3) describe the specific allegations of research misconduct considered in the investigation;  (4) describe composition of the investigation committee, including name(s), position(s), and subject matter expertise;  (5) include the inventory of sequestered research records and other evidence, except records UNMC did not consider or rely on, with a description of how any sequestration was conducted during the investigation and including manuscripts and funding proposals that were considered or relied on in the investigation;  (6) include transcripts of all interviews conducted;  (7) identify any specific published papers, manuscripts submitted but not accepted for publication (including online publication), funding applications, progress reports, presentations, posters, or other research records that allegedly contain the falsified, fabricated, or plagiarized materials;  (8) describe any scientific or forensic analyses conducted;  (9) include the institutional policies and procedures under which the investigation was conducted;  (10) include any comments made by the respondent and complainant on the draft investigation report and the investigation committee’s consideration of those comments;  (11) include a statement of findings for each allegation of research misconduct identified during the investigation, summarizing the basis for the investigation committee’s decision and proposed corrective actions (if any). The statement shall include the identity of the individual(s) who committed the research misconduct, the type of misconduct (falsification, fabrication, or plagiarism), indicate whether the research misconduct was committed intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly; and state whether the requirements for finding research misconduct have been met. If the committee does not recommend a finding of research misconduct for an allegation, the investigation report must provide a detailed rationale; and  (12) If the investigation took longer than 180 days to complete, include the reasons for exceeding the 180-day period.