On April 23rd, Netease News discovered 107 exposed fake papers, and made public the names, papers, working institutions and departments of all 524 China doctors suspected of fraud.
Judging from the information published at present, the 107 medical paper returned from China is suspected of being forged in a rather bad way. They took advantage of the loopholes in the peer review system to recommend famous experts in the field of cancer to the editor-in-chief of Tumor Biology as peer reviewers of their papers, that is, peer review; Then forge the mailboxes of these judges, and finally forge experts to praise them through their own papers.
This will be the most complete list of fake papers in China so far, including Peking Union Medical College, Fudan University, Zhejiang University and Wuhan University.
User comments: How can clinicians have time to write papers? This is a typical forced prostitution!
User comments: Medical college professors and clinicians really should be treated differently. Just like you can't use the standards of computer professors to ask engineers to write code.
User comments: First of all, there are such things at home and abroad. Secondly, clinicians must have papers to be promoted, which is unreasonable in itself. It's definitely just the tip of the iceberg.
User comments: Don't talk about hospital evaluation titles. Academic fraud is not to kill you, not to cut you off. If you dare to make academic fraud for the evaluation of professional titles, you can't keep the bottom line. Such people actually forged medical records in front of patients, misdiagnosed them, and caused medical accidents! Because the bottom line is gone, there is nothing to argue about.
Netizen's comment: Famous doctors and experts are not piled up by these things, but many doctors who work hard have not received corresponding honors.
Netizen comments: One or two people cheating is a moral problem, and most people cheating is an institutional problem.
Netizen comment: In layman's view, it is a particularly shameful and conspicuous thing to withdraw the manuscript, but it is not necessarily so. There are many reasons for withdrawing the manuscript, and academic misconduct is only one of them. I think the China Association for Science and Technology did the right thing. This is not shielding Dr. China, but strengthening communication. Because some doctors may rely entirely on the gunman's company for funding, which is academic misconduct. But it is more likely that the research is true, but China people's English is poor, so they need to polish it and change it into more authentic English. At this time, the retouching company will help the agent and charge a fee. When acting as an agent, we used our brains to forge peer review opinions. These are all common methods used by gunmen's companies. Peer review has the option of recommending reviewers. The reviewer is real, and the email address is fake. Send back fake comments by fake mail. If a magazine wants to think of the loopholes in the rules, China Association for Science and Technology should negotiate with it, hoping that it will rectify and strengthen communication. This is very correct. Now there are more and more exchanges between China and the world, so we must understand the rules of the game, so as to be comfortable. If someone denies medical scientific research and advocates that clinicians can only see a doctor and can't do scientific research, it will be partial. All clinical development benefits from medical research. Now it is a question of how to do a good job in clinical research, including how to contribute correctly, rather than denying clinical research.