This systematic review analyzes the prevalence of scientific misconduct in health research, suggesting a significant need for improved integrity and ethics.
Key Points
To synthesize self-reported prevalence rates of scientific misconduct in health-related research.
Conducted a systematic search across six databases and gray literature sources.
Included observational studies detailing misconduct among health researchers and professionals.
Used the Joanna Briggs Institute checklist for methodological quality assessment and performed a random-effects meta-analysis.
Twenty-nine studies analyzed 17,919 responses on misconduct prevalence.
Honorary authorship was the most common misconduct at 32%, followed by plagiarism at 28%.
Data falsification was reported at 12%, data fabrication at 11%, and methodological manipulation at 4%.
High heterogeneity observed in most outcomes, indicating variability among studies.