Abstract
This study aimed to explore the gap between attitudes towards and personally observed breaches of research integrity among medical postgraduates in China, a critical yet understudied population. We conducted an online, cross-sectional survey among postgraduates at three Chinese medical schools. A self-administered questionnaire was used to evaluate their attitudes toward research integrity breaches and their perceptions of such behaviors among peers. Among 983 respondents (719 master’s, 264 doctoral), a strong majority condemned serious research misconduct. Only 0.93% expressed acceptance for falsifying images to reverse results, and 1.53% for manipulating data to achieve significance. However, peer-reports revealed a higher prevalence of observed misconduct, with 18.41% indicating knowledge of data fabrication among peers. In conclusion, while Chinese medical postgraduates largely condemn serious research misconduct, the peer-reported occurrence of such behaviors indicates that ethical awareness has not been fully translated into practice. These findings highlight the need for bolstered educational initiatives and suggest that the peer-report method can be a key tool for educators to assess and address integrity issues within their institutions.
Similar content being viewed by others
Data availability
The datasets used and analyzed in this study are available upon reasonable request. The corresponding author can be contacted for access.
Abbreviations
- SCI:
-
Science citation index
- SPSS:
-
Statistical product and service solutions
References
Kretser, A. et al. Scientific integrity principles and best practices: Recommendations from a Scientific Integrity Consortium. Sci. Eng. Ethics. 25, 327–355 (2019).
White House Office of Science and Technology Policy. A Framework for Federal Scientific Integrity Policy and Practice (Whitehouse, 2023).
ALLEA. The European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity (ALLEA, 2023).
Cao, Y., Jiang, Y. & Zhao, Y. A study on the content of integrity policies and research integrity management in Chinese universities. Front. Res. Metr. Anal. https://doi.org/10.3389/frma.2023.943228 (2023).
Yi, N., Nemery, B. & Dierickx, K. Integrity in biomedical research: A systematic review of studies in China. Sci. Eng. Ethics. 25, 1271–1301 (2019).
Shu, F., Liu, S. & Larivière, V. China’s research evaluation reform: What are the consequences for global science? Minerva 60, 329–347 (2022).
Wang, Z.-H., Zhou, G.-H., Sun, L.-P. & Gang, J. Challenges in the ethics review process of clinical scientific research projects in China. J. Int. Med. Res. 47, 4636–4643 (2019).
Xie, Y., Zhang, C. & Lai, Q. China’s rise as a major contributor to science and technology. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 111, 9437–9442 (2014).
Hofmann, B., Helgesson, G., Juth, N. & Holm, S. Scientific dishonesty: A survey of doctoral students at the major medical faculties in Sweden and Norway. J. Empir. Res. Hum. Res. Ethics. 10, 380–388 (2015).
Hofmann, B., Thoresen, M. & Holm, S. Research integrity attitudes and behaviors are difficult to alter: Results from a ten year follow-up study in Norway. J. Empir. Res. Hum. Res. Ethics. 18, 50–57 (2023).
Miao, M. et al. Research on scientific research integrity behavior and knowledge of medical postgraduates. Chin. J. Med. Sci. Res. Manag. 443–447 (2017).
Chen, L. et al. Knowledge, attitudes and practices about research misconduct among medical residents in Southwest China: A cross-sectional study. BMC Med. Educ. 24284. (2024).
Xie, Y., Wang, K. & Kong, Y. Prevalence of research misconduct and questionable research practices: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Sci. Eng. Ethics 27, 41 (2021).
Rankin, M. & Esteves, M. D. Perceptions of scientific misconduct in nursing. Nurs. Res. 46, 270–276 (1997).
Broome, M. E., Pryor, E., Habermann, B., Pulley, L. & Kincaid, H. The scientific misconduct questionnaire—Revised (SMQ-R): Validation and psychometric testing. Acc. Res. 12, 263–280 (2005).
Tijdink, J. K. et al. Personality traits are associated with research misbehavior in Dutch scientists: A cross-sectional study. PLoS. One 11, e0163251 (2016).
Tijdink, J. K., Verbeke, R. & Smulders, Y. M. Publication pressure and scientific misconduct in medical scientists. J. Empir. Res. Hum. Res. Ethics 9, 64–71 (2014).
Dar, U. F. & Khan, Y. S. Self-reported academic misconduct among medical students: Perception and prevalence. Sci. World J. 2021, 1–8 (2021).
Veríssimo, A. C. et al. Validation of the academic misconduct questionnaire: Exploring predictors of student misconduct. Med. Educ. Online. https://doi.org/10.1080/10872981.2025.2506739 (2025).
Kearney, M., Downing, M. & Gignac, E. A. Research integrity and academic medicine: The pressure to publish and research misconduct. J. Osteopath. Med. 124, 187–194 (2024).
Jin, Y. et al. A study on the knowledge, attitude, and practice of research integrity among medical professionals in Ningxia, China. BMC. Med. Educ. 24, 1355 (2024).
Zhou, W.-Q., Zhang, C.-R., Xing, Y. & Luan, W. Addressing the research integrity crisis in nursing: A view from China. Int. J. Nurs. Stud. 171, 105149 (2025).
Wu, X. et al. Status of scientific research integrity knowledge in dental undergraduates from 34 universities in China. BMC Med. Ethics 26, 29 (2025).
Acknowledgements
The authors gratefully acknowledge the participation of the medical postgraduates from the three Chinese medical schools who contributed to this study.
Funding
This work was supported by the Science and Technological Supports Project of Sichuan Province, China [grant number 2020JDR0083 and 2025NSFSCR0104].
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
This study was collaboratively conducted with contributions from all authors in various aspects including design, implementation, data analysis, and manuscript preparation. Zeng Wen, Zhou Jingya, and Tang Haitao played a pivotal role in conceptualizing and designing the research. Wang Jinsong took the lead in administering the questionnaire survey. The drafting of the manuscript was principally undertaken by Tang Haitao and Zhou Jingya.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Ethics approval
This study was approved by the Ethics Committee on Biomedical Research, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, 2020 Review (No.890).
Consent to participate
All participants received informed consent.
Additional information
Publisher’s note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary Information
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this licence to share adapted material derived from this article or parts of it. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Haitao, T., Jingya, Z., Jinsong, W. et al. A multicenter cross-sectional study on perceptions and peer-reported prevalence of research misconduct among Chinese medical postgraduates. Sci Rep (2026). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-026-42834-z
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-026-42834-z
