Abstract:Abstract Context This narrative review article explores research integrity and the implications of scholarly work in medical education. The paper describes how the current landscape of medical education emphasizes research and scholarly activity for medical students, resident physicians, and faculty physician educators. There is a gap in the existing literature that fully explores research integrity, the challenges surrounding the significant pressure to perform scholarly activity, and the potential for ethical lapses by those involved in medical education. Objectives The objectives of this review article are to provide a background on authorship and publication safeguards, outline common types of research misconduct, describe the implications of publication in medical education, discuss the consequences of ethical breaches, and outline possible solutions to promote research integrity in academic medicine. Methods To complete this narrative review, the authors explored the current literature utilizing multiple databases beginning in June of 2021, and they completed the literature review in January of 2023. To capture the wide scope of the review, numerous searches were performed. A number of Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) terms were utilized to identify relevant articles. The MeSH terms included “scientific misconduct,” “research misconduct,” “authorship,” “plagiarism,” “biomedical research/ethics,” “faculty, medical,” “fellowships and scholarships,” and “internship and residency.” Additional references were accessed to include medical school and residency accreditation standards, residency match statistics, regulatory guidelines, and standard definitions. Results Within the realm of academic medicine, research misconduct and misrepresentation continue to occur without clear solutions. There is a wide range of severity in breaches of research integrity, ranging from minor infractions to fraud. Throughout the medical education system in the United States, there is pressure to publish research and scholarly work. Higher rates of publications are associated with a successful residency match for students and academic promotion for faculty physicians. For those who participate in research misconduct, there is a multitude of potential adverse consequences. Potential solutions to ensure research integrity exist but are not without barriers to implementation. Conclusions Pressure in the world of academic medicine to publish contributes to the potential for research misconduct and authorship misrepresentation. Lapses in research integrity can result in a wide range of potentially adverse consequences for the offender, their institution, the scientific community, and the public. If adopted, universal research integrity policies and procedures could make major strides in eliminating research misconduct in the realm of academic medicine.

Heart transplantation for end-stage valvular disease: indications and results

Rooting out scientific misconduct

A meta-analytic approach to ilioinguinal nerve excision or preservation during open inguinal hernia repair.

A vitronectin-derived peptide reverses ovariectomy-induced bone loss via regulation of osteoblast and osteoclast differentiation

Status of retraction notices for biomedical publications associated with research misconduct

Productivity Patterns, Collaboration and Scientific Careers of Authors with Retracted Publications in Clinical Medicine

Disciplinary Sanctions for Police Misconduct: An Empirical Analysis of Sanction Severity

Misconduct Policies, Academic Culture and Career Stage, Not Gender or Pressures to Publish, Affect Scientific Integrity

The perceived causes of research misconduct among faculty members in the natural, social, and applied sciences

A scoping review of the literature featuring research ethics and research integrity cases

Defining "recklessness" in research misconduct proceedings

Should research administrators be regulated as carefully as researchers?

An International Study of Research Misconduct Policies

Assessment criteria for research misconduct: Taiwanese researchers' perceptions

Prevalence of Research Misconduct and Questionable Research Practices: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Influence of Depth of Suture Bite on Integrity of Single-Layer Large-Bowel Anastomoses: Controlled Trial 1

Do individual and institutional predictors of misconduct vary by country? Results of a matched-control analysis of problematic image duplications

Experiences of Physicians Investigated for Professionalism Concerns: a Narrative Review

Is it time to revise the definition of research misconduct?

Research integrity and academic medicine: the pressure to publish and research misconduct

Perceptions of Chinese Biomedical Researchers Towards Academic Misconduct: A Comparison Between 2015 and 2010