Wikimedia/keminaBaker IDI Heart and Diabetes Institute in MelbourneWikimedia/kemina
In late September 2015, The Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) retracted a scientific article about the effects of an anti-hypertension drug. The paper, which had been published in 2013 and received 35 citations, claimed that Ramipril, a medication used to control blood pressure, had a supplementary benefit: it would help patients who have problems with circulation feel less pain when walking. The pillars that supported that conclusion collapsed when the principal author, Australian Anna Ahimastos, admitted that some of the data cited in the article had been made-up. The paper was based on a three-year clinical trial with 212 individuals, average age 65, recruited in the Australian cities of Melbourne, Townsville, and Brisbane. Ahimastos confessed that many of the Melbourne patients never existed and that their records had been fabricated. The researcher told an investigatory committee that the results favorable to Ramipril presented in the article had been obtained in a smaller clinical trial done at a later date.
Ahimastos was working at the Baker IDI Heart and Diabetes Institute in Melbourne and was dismissed when the scandal erupted. The investigation began in June 2015, when a researcher from the institution noted inconsistencies in the research data supplied in the article. According to the internal investigation, none of the co-authors knew of the problem. Bronwyn Kingwell, head of the laboratory where the fraud took place, said Ahimastos is a PhD with 10 years of experience, had received training in good clinical practices, and was qualified for the work. “We worked as a team in an atmosphere of great mutual trust in which each individual assumes serious responsibilities. Unfortunately, the person who breached that trust was the one responsible for collecting the data,” says Kingwell, who had signed 16 articles with her former colleague, including the JAMA article. Although the institute says this was an isolated case, it is re-evaluating its procedures, especially those related to the way its researchers collect and present research data, in order to prevent the incident from recurring. Other papers published by Ahimastos are being examined. At least one of them, published in the journal Circulation Research, has also been retracted.
Virginia Barbour, president of the Committee on Publication Ethics, a forum that offers scientific editors guidance in good practices, says that cases like this one may be an effect of the exacerbation of the “publish or perish” culture. She told ABC-TV: “We believe that one of the problems is the pressure to publish, and to publish in high-impact journals.” She cited a study done in the United Kingdom in 2014 in which researchers said that in order to meet high expectations, they might potentially cut corners and commit ethical missteps.
Republish