Eliminate the promotion of clinicians to "only thesis"! National Health Commission and other three departments jointly issued a document

• by EVOMT
• 2021-03-22

　　

 

　　Persons who have no substantial academic contributions may not be named

　　Will the publication of the thesis be goodbye to the awards, bonuses, and clinical evaluations?

　　On February 20th, the official website of the National Health Commission announced that the National Health Commission, the Ministry of Science and Technology, and the State Administration of Traditional Chinese Medicine revised the "Code of Conduct for Medical Research Integrity" (hereinafter referred to as the "Code") in combination with relevant laws and regulations. The "Specifications" shall be implemented as of the date of promulgation.

　　"The Norms" clarify the basic norms that medical research activities should follow, highlight the main responsibility of scientific research integrity of medical research institutions, and propose "; "It is not allowed to link the number of published papers, impact factors, etc., to personnel awards, bonuses, clinical work assessments, etc.”";.

　　The Code also responds to the challenges faced by the integrity of medical research and proposes that non substantive academic contributions should not be made; Name” Signature; In addition to assuming leadership and guidance responsibilities, supervisors and research project leaders who agree to participate in the signing process should also bear the same responsibilities as those directly responsible for scientific research misconduct.

　　

 

　

　　Screenshot of the Specification

　　Focus on these requirements for medical institutions

　　In order to address the challenges faced by the current integrity of medical research, the Code includes medical research institutions in the integrity standard system, and puts forward specific responsibilities and requirements for them:

　　The academic committee shall regularly organize or entrust academic organizations and third-party institutions to verify important academic papers and other scientific research achievements of medical researchers in the institution;

　　2. Medical research institutions should strengthen the management of scientific research achievements and establish achievement management systems such as the integrity commitment system for academic paper publication, the traceability system for scientific research processes, and the inspection and reporting system for scientific research achievements;

　　Medical research institutions should strengthen the signature management of scientific research papers and achievements published, and seriously investigate the responsibility for non substantive contributions according to law and regulations;

　　4. Medical research institutions should strengthen the management of published papers by medical research personnel within their own institutions, and it is not allowed to link the number of published papers, impact factors, etc. with personnel awards, clinical work assessments, etc;

　　5. Medical research institutions should promptly submit their handling decisions to the competent scientific research integrity department for verified scientific research dishonesty, and serve as an important reference for their job promotion, professional title evaluation, achievement awards, evaluation and commendation.

　　As the scope of application of the Code covers all personnel engaged in medical research activities and institutions conducting medical research work, medical and health institutions naturally rank among them.

　　"The wind direction of breaking away from literary criticism is obvious"

　　In China, the number of papers published by doctors and the geometry of impact factors have long been linked to their professional title evaluation and salary level.

　　On June 5, 2019, the Department of Human Resources and Social Security of Guangdong Province publicly released the "Regulations on the Evaluation of Senior Professional and Technical Titles of Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital". Among them, the requirements for assessing the scientific research performance of chief physicians include: academic papers must be published in Category I - IV journals, with at least one clinical research treatise and one Category III or above journal treatise.

　　According to the official website of Xiangya Hospital of Central South University, the necessary conditions for the evaluation of the professional title of chief physician in clinical medicine in 2020 include publishing more than 4 papers by the first author or corresponding author of this major, including more than 1 paper included in SCI, more than 2 papers included in Medline, or more than 3 papers published in CSCD source journals.

　　As hard indicators that can be seen and touched, the quantity and quality of papers can indeed play a role in verifying the technical ability and level of doctors. However, due to the large population base and the large number of patients seeking medical treatment in China, the generally onerous frontline clinical work often cannot be reconciled with scientific research requirements, and doctors' falsification of papers has once become a serious disaster area in China.

　　On April 20, 2017, Springer Publishing Group's "Tumor Biology" decided to revoke 107 papers suspected of peer review fraud in China. The corresponding authors of these papers were even signed by prestigious universities such as the Union Medical College, Fudan University, and Zhejiang University.

　　On September 16, 2020, the official website of the Ministry of Science and Technology reported nine scientific research violations, six of which occurred in hospitals, including the Cancer Hospital of China Medical University and the Suzhou Hospital affiliated to Nanjing Medical University. The author of the article is a frontline doctor, as well as a senior physician and deputy hospital dean. There are even several papers supported by the National Natural Science Foundation.

　　In fact, attempts have been made at the national level to break the tie between papers and the evaluation and employment of doctors' professional titles. On February 23, 2020, the Ministry of Science and Technology issued the Notice on Several Measures to Eliminate the Bad Doctoral Orientation in Scientific and Technological Evaluation (for Trial Implementation), proposing to improve the scientific and technological evaluation system and eliminate the Bad Doctoral Orientation in Scientific and Technological Evaluation.

　　When "Tumor Biology" withdrew 107 papers from China, "China Youth Daily" published a report on "Why American doctors won't be largely withdrawn". It is mentioned that, on the one hand, academic misconduct in the United States can be extremely costly, and once faked, one will no longer be able to engage in scientific research.

　　On the other hand, clinicians there have no scientific research requirements, just need to concentrate on seeing a doctor. Doctors who are interested in scientific research have to work full-time in teaching hospitals to improve their professional titles. After all, the environment is different.

　　Source: Medical Think Tank