TY - JOUR
T1 - The development of a taxonomy of wrongdoing in medical practice and research
AU - Dubois, James M.
AU - Kraus, Elena
AU - Vasher, Meghan
N1 - Funding Information:
The UPWARD program (Understanding and Preventing Wrongdoing in American Healthcare Research and Delivery) seeks to understand the complex variables that causally contribute to wrongdoing in order to identify appropriate prevention strategies involving education, policy, and oversight. The program currently is supported by two grants, a BF Charitable Foundation seed grant and an NIH (NCRR/ORI) R21 award. These two grants will enable the analysis of cases of wrongdoing in medicine and health research. Three hundred cases have been screened for inclusion in the project. However, developing a valid and reliable taxonomy of wrongdoing in medical practice and research has proven to be a necessary first step to guide literature reviews, sampling, and statistical analyses (e.g., comparing factors predictive of fraud versus improper prescribing).
Funding Information:
This project was made possible with support from grants UL1RR024992 and 1R21RR026313 from the NIH National Center for Research Resources (NCRR) and a seed grant from the BF Charitable Foundation .
PY - 2012/1
Y1 - 2012/1
N2 - "Ethical disasters" or egregious violations of professional ethics in medicine often receive substantial amounts of publicity, leading to mistrust of the medical system. Efforts to understand wrongdoing in medical practice and research are hampered by the absence of a clear taxonomy. This article describes the authors' process of developing a taxonomy based on (1) reviews of academic literature, ethics codes, government regulations, and cases of wrongdoing; (2) consultation with experts in health law and healthcare ethics; and (3) application of the taxonomy to published cases of wrongdoing in medical research and practice. The resulting taxonomy includes 14 categories of wrongdoing in medical practice and 15 categories of wrongdoing in medical research. This taxonomy may be useful to oversight bodies, researchers who seek to understand and reduce the prevalence of wrongdoing in medicine, and librarians who index literature on wrongdoing.
AB - "Ethical disasters" or egregious violations of professional ethics in medicine often receive substantial amounts of publicity, leading to mistrust of the medical system. Efforts to understand wrongdoing in medical practice and research are hampered by the absence of a clear taxonomy. This article describes the authors' process of developing a taxonomy based on (1) reviews of academic literature, ethics codes, government regulations, and cases of wrongdoing; (2) consultation with experts in health law and healthcare ethics; and (3) application of the taxonomy to published cases of wrongdoing in medical research and practice. The resulting taxonomy includes 14 categories of wrongdoing in medical practice and 15 categories of wrongdoing in medical research. This taxonomy may be useful to oversight bodies, researchers who seek to understand and reduce the prevalence of wrongdoing in medicine, and librarians who index literature on wrongdoing.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=83755172599&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.amepre.2011.08.027
DO - 10.1016/j.amepre.2011.08.027
M3 - Review article
C2 - 22176853
AN - SCOPUS:83755172599
SN - 0749-3797
VL - 42
SP - 89
EP - 98
JO - American Journal of Preventive Medicine
JF - American Journal of Preventive Medicine
IS - 1
ER -