Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

Ensuring research integrity: setting standards for robust and ethical conduct and reporting of research

  • Kamaldeep S. Bhui (a1), William Lee (a2), Kenneth R. Kaufman (a3) and Stephen M. Lawrie (a4)

Summary

We present an account of why we decided to retract a paper. We discovered a lack of adherence to conventional trials registration, execution, interpretation and reporting, and consequently, with the authors, needed to correct the scientific record. We set out our responses in general to strengthen research integrity.

Declaration of interest

K.S.B. is Editor-in-Chief of the British Journal of Psychiatry. W.L., K.R.K. and S.M.L. are members of the senior editorial committee and the research integrity committee for the journal. In the past three years, S.M.L. has received research support from Janssen and Lundbeck, and personal support from Janssen, Otsuka and Sunovion.

  • View HTML
    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      Ensuring research integrity: setting standards for robust and ethical conduct and reporting of research
      Available formats
      ×

      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      Ensuring research integrity: setting standards for robust and ethical conduct and reporting of research
      Available formats
      ×

      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      Ensuring research integrity: setting standards for robust and ethical conduct and reporting of research
      Available formats
      ×

Copyright

Corresponding author

Correspondence: Kamaldeep Bhui, Centre for Psychiatry, Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Barts & The London School of Medicine, Old Anatomy Building, Charterhouse. Square, London EC1M 6BQ, UK. Email: k.s.bhui@qmul.ac.uk

References

Hide All
1Guo, ZH, Li, ZJ, Ma, Y, Sun, J, Guo, JH, Li, WX, et al. Brief cognitive–behavioural therapy for patients in the community with schizophrenia: randomised controlled trial in Beijing, China. Br J Psychiatry 2017; 210: 223–9.
2Guo, ZH, Li, ZJ, Ma, Y, Sun, J, Guo, JH, Li, WX, et al. Brief cognitive–behavioural therapy for patients in the community with schizophrenia: randomised controlled trial in Beijing, China – Expression of Concern. Br J Psychiatry 2019; 214: 119.

Keywords

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed

Ensuring research integrity: setting standards for robust and ethical conduct and reporting of research

  • Kamaldeep S. Bhui (a1), William Lee (a2), Kenneth R. Kaufman (a3) and Stephen M. Lawrie (a4)
Submit a response

eLetters

Mistakes are the portals of discovery

Dr Julia O'Leary, Registrar , Cluain Mhuire Community Adult Mental Health Services
16 August 2019

Dear Editor,

I applaud the difficult decision to retract the paper1, published March 2017, on the effectiveness of brief CBT on Chinese patients with schizophrenia2. This retraction was based on concerns about the integrity of the findings, and the representation of them. The commitment to research integrity by the BJPsych is to be commended. Unfortunately this difficult decision may not prevent the paper, and the finding, from echoing in the literature in years to come.

A quick review of scholar.google.com suggests that the paper has been cited on 11 occasions (excepting the discussion of its retraction) since publication, two of which post-dated the expression of concern published by the BJPsych in September 20183, and one of which is a citation by an author of the retracted paper.

Continued citation of retracted articles is of concern, and positive citations have been seen to persist despite retraction notices3, in some cases for years or even increasing following withdrawal4,5. There is considerable likelihood of this occurring in this case- there remain multiple versions of the paper available on the internet, some of which do not indicate its subsequent retraction.

Robust editorial and peer review processes would guard against the citation of retracted papers, but this requires these processes to function as the solutions to problems their failings created.

It may be clichéd to say that a mistruth can fly around the world before the truth can get its boots on. When it comes to appraisal of the effectiveness of CBT for psychotic disorders, it is early, and the truth has catching up to do.

Yours etc,

Dr Julia O’Leary, MRCPsych, MCPsychI

Registrar

Cluain Mhuire

1. Guo ZH, Li ZJ, Ma Y, Sun J, Guo JH, Li WX, Wang ZQ, Xu HL, Ng RMK, Turkington D, Kingdon D. Brief cognitive-behavioural therapy for patients in the community with schizophrenia: Randomised controlled trial in Beijing, China - RETRACTION. Br J Psychiatry. 2019 Jul;215(1):435. doi: 10.1192/bjp.2019.91. Epub 2019 May 21.

2. Guo ZH, Li ZJ, Ma Y, Sun J, Guo JH, Li WX, Wang ZQ, Xu HL, Ng RM, Turkington D, Kingdon D. Brief cognitive-behavioural therapy for patients in the community with schizophrenia: randomised controlled trial in Beijing, China. Br J Psychiatry. 2017 Mar Epub 2017 Jan 9. doi: 10.1192/bjp.bp.116.183285. Epub 2017 Jan 9

3. Guo ZH, Li ZJ, Ma Y, Sun J, Guo JH, Li WX, Wang ZQ, Xu HL, Ng RMK, Turkington D, Kingdon D. Brief cognitive-behavioural therapy for patients in the community with schizophrenia: Randomised controlled trial in Beijing, China - Expression of Concern. Br J Psychiatry. 2018 Sep 17:119. doi: 10.1192/bjp.2018.198.

4. Budd JM1, Sievert M, Schultz TR. Phenomena of retraction: reasons for retraction and citations to the publications. JAMA. 1998 Jul 15;280(3):296-7.

5. Bornemann-Cimenti, H., Szilagyi, I. S., & Sandner-Kiesling, A. (2015). Perpetuation of retracted publications using the example of the Scott S. Reuben case: Incidences, reasons and possible improvements. Science Engineering Ethics. doi: 10.1007/s11948-015-9680-y.

... More

Conflict of interest: None declared

Write a reply

×

Reply to: Submit a response


Your details


Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *