Mechanisms required to ensure research integrity

I read with great interest CMAJ’s editorial of May 9: “The need for new mechanisms to ensure research integrity.”1

The editorial officially reacts to the recent publication of the excellent report from the Council of Canadian Academies (CCA) entitled, Honesty, Accountability and Trust: Fostering Research Integrity in Canada. I am delighted that CCA has taken this initiative and I congratulate Professor Paul Davenport for his commendable leadership. He has convened a committee of competent experts who have put forth a memorable document that may become the Canadian Bible on the subject. Not only has this committee covered all aspects of the question, it has added a voluminous amount of documentation that will assist future generations. This report suggests the creation of the Canadian Council for Research Integrity whose responsibilities would be nevertheless limited to prevention and promotion.

The CMAJ editorial mentions that any institution acting on the surveillance of integrity in research in Canada must also investigate and sanction scientific misconduct. I would like to add that we should not wait for the next major scandal before providing the necessary tools to react promptly and accordingly with pre-established rules that will be known to all partners in research, whether institutions and their administrators, scientists and students.

I wholly support the courageous position of the CMAJ. It brings an essential element that will project Canada to the forefront, toward the protection of the scientific community from the misconduct of a small minority of its members. These people put in jeopardy a duly acquired credibility that is weakened by dishonest actions of irresponsible colleagues who are most frequently ill-intentioned.

I believe in the benefits of education and prevention, but they are highly insufficient if they are not followed by sanctions for misconduct. I am of the strong opinion that these actions must be undertaken while abiding by respective institutional jurisdictions. The Canadian legislation and constitutional framework must be sufficiently flexible to meet the anticipated objectives.

I hope the CMAJ’s suggestion will receive the appropriate attention it deserves and will be adopted by our authorities.