国产热热热精品,亚洲视频久久】日韩,三级婷婷在线久久,99人妻精品视频,精品九热人人肉肉在线,AV东京热一区二区,91po在线视频观看,久久激情宗合,青青草黄色手机视频

Global EditionASIA 中文雙語Fran?ais
Opinion
Home / Opinion / Opinion Line

Phoney articles reflect flawed system

China Daily | Updated: 2017-04-25 07:47
Share
Share - WeChat

A Chinese doctor talks with family members of a young patient as he examines him with a Type-b Ultrasonic Diagnostic Instrument at a hospital in Beijing, China, 11 September 2013. [Photo/IC]

GERMAN PUBLISHER SPRINGER announced on Thursday it was retracting 107 articles that were published between 2012 and 2016 in its medical journal Tumor Biology, due to irregularities in the peer-review process for the articles, most of which were by Chinese researchers. Southern Metropolis Daily commented on Monday:

Albeit Springer's mass retraction of questionable papers is not new to Chinese authors, it sets a precedent regarding the number of simultaneously retracted papers, and is likely to deal a heavy blow to the image of China's medical researchers.

Springer said that the email addresses of the peer reviewers, normally distinguished experts in the same field, were fabricated, which put the peer reviews in doubt. A subsequent investigation discovered that the reviewers did not conduct any peer reviews, and it is possible that their names were used by some third-party agencies without their consent.

It is common that many Chinese authors entrust their manuscripts to third-party agencies for language polishing. These agencies feast on the supervisory gray area not reached by regulatory authorities such as the China Association for Science and Technology.

Springer has proposed requiring more information about the reviewers and developing software to better scrutinize articles. But such efforts are not necessarily a root cure for the problem, as the third-party agencies, if not dealt with seriously, will always find a way to bypass supervision and charge for their "publication assistance".

To acquire higher professional ranks and titles, Chinese doctors hired by public hospitals, be they researchers or surgeons, have to publish their works in reputable scientific journals. The more they do the easier it is for them to get research funds and professional titles, which of course mean better pay.

In stark contrast, only 7 or 9 percent of the about 1.6 million US doctors can apply to be an associate professor or professor, and the rest are all practitioners that bear no research or academic responsibilities. It is hardly convincing that Chinese public hospitals need more research doctors.

Most Viewed in 24 Hours
Top
BACK TO THE TOP
English
Copyright 1994 - . All rights reserved. The content (including but not limited to text, photo, multimedia information, etc) published in this site belongs to China Daily Information Co (CDIC). Without written authorization from CDIC, such content shall not be republished or used in any form. Note: Browsers with 1024*768 or higher resolution are suggested for this site.
License for publishing multimedia online 0108263

Registration Number: 130349
FOLLOW US
德令哈市| 景德镇市| 内黄县| 波密县| 陕西省| 高州市| 三明市| 贵南县| 蒙山县| 依安县| 白河县| 乐业县| 鄂尔多斯市| 无为县| 中宁县| 清丰县| 米泉市| 威海市| 五家渠市| 吴川市| 辛集市| 阿坝县| 江都市| 开江县| 长海县| 张家界市| 景东| 进贤县| 聂拉木县| 潍坊市| 日土县| 高平市| 焦作市| 景泰县| 阿拉善盟| 辰溪县| 波密县| 宁安市| 枝江市| 牟定县| 甘德县|