Perceptions of research integrity and open science practices: a survey of Brazilian dental researchers

Aim: To evaluate the perceptions of Brazilian dental researchers of research integrity and open science practices, as well as their perceptions of how researchers are assessed for promotion, hiring, and receiving grants. Methods: In a self-administered online survey, the respondents were presented with 3 questions on researcher evaluation in Brazil. Additionally, for 25 academic activities or characteristics, researchers rated their perceived importance for (I) advancing career, (II) advancing science, (III) personal satisfaction, and (IV) social impact. The questionnaire was sent to a total of 2,179 dental researchers working in the graduate programs in dentistry in Brazil. Multilevel regressions were performed to statistically confirm the differences between predefined subgroups. Results: 355 (16%) researchers completed the survey. Most respondents (96,1%) considered the current evaluation system to be flawed and indicated the need for improvement. Non-traditional activities were considered more important than traditional ones for advancing science (p<.01), and social impact (p<.01), whereas traditional activities were perceived to be more important only for advancing careers (p<.01). Conclusion: Although Brazilian dental researchers recognize the value of open science and research integrity practices for advancing science and impact on society, they perceive that the current evaluation system emphasizes traditional activities such as publishing many papers in well-recognized journals as criteria to advance their careers. Clinical significance: Misalignment between researchers’ priorities and open science and research integrity goals highlights a need for reforms in academic rewarding systems. We expect that such reforms would make clinical research more valid and relevant, indirectly improving dental care.