![Sample our Education journals, sign in here to start your access, latest two full volumes FREE to you for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5932/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Education.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
On May 22, 2017, administrative law Judge Leslie Rogall of the Department of Health and Human Services’ Departmental Appeals Board, Civil Remedies Division, ruled in favor of the Office of Research Integrity (ORI) concerning its decision to charge former University of California at Riverside biochemistry professor Frank Sauer with research misconduct for fabricating or falsifying digital image data included in three papers and seven grant applications submitted to the National Institutes of Health. More specifically, Sauer was deemed responsible for manipulating, reusing, and falsely labeling images of autoradiograms and gels in his research in epigenetics. One month after this decision, ORI announced its final ruling concerning Sauer, which barred him from serving in any advisory capacity to the Public Health Services and required him to retract affected papers. The case raises some interesting and important questions concerning research integrity because it focused on the legal issue of what constitutes recklessness in scientific research.
Acknowledgments
David Resnik is supported by National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS), National Institutes of Health (NIH). Elise Smith is supported by the NIEHS/NIH and the Fonds de Recherche du Québec en Santé (FRQS). Stefanie Chen and Carlos Goller acknowledge support from the Biotechnology Program at North Carolina State University (NCSU). This paper does not represent the views of the NIEHS, NIH, FRQS, NCSU or the U.S. federal government.
Funding
This work was supported by the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences [ZIAES102646-08]; Fonds de Recherche du Québec en Santé.