Mary admires the NIH-funded work of her postdoctoral advisor, Henryk, who pioneers research on alternative treatments for fever due to infectious diseases. Mary is one of many co-workers who has assisted Henryk in compiling the most comprehensive database ever assembled, tracking many different infectious agents, species of animals, and different interventions and their outcomes. Henryk’s interpretation of this rich dataset suggests that some “alternative medicines” are highly effective in certain species, but have no therapeutic value in others. He is completing his analysis and interpretation, and is preparing a manuscript for submission. Mary will be a co-author because of her part in collecting data for the study.
Mary is preparing to seek an Assistant Professor position and wants to build on her postdoctoral work. She asks Henryk for permission to use the dataset to develop her own project. However, she plans to use a different methodology for analysis and interpretation of the dataset to address a different aspect of the outcomes of treatment. At that point, she will develop a career development proposal to submit to the NIH.
Henryk is unwilling to share the entire dataset prior to publishing his interpretation of these data. However, Mary has access to the database as part of her current project, and therefore she decides that it is ethical for her to look more closely at the data. Mary spends quite a lot of time looking at the data and Henryk’s analysis, and realizes that he has excluded specific datapoints that impact his interpretation. Henryk’s draft manuscript carefully justifies the exclusion of these data in the methods section so that there is no issue with data falsification.
Mary realizes that if she includes these datapoints, an entirely new understanding of therapies to treat fever could emerge. Mary is excited about her impending grant proposal, but is concerned about how to broach the discussion of her use of the data with Henryk.
Discussion Questions
1. Must Henryk share his database with Mary before publication? After publication? Must he share it with others, outside his lab, and if so, when?
2. Who owns the database at this point: Henryk? The institution? NIH? The public?
3. Why is sharing a dataset beneficial to the person who collected it? How is it potentially risky?
4. Is Henryk obligated to document how datapoints were included or excluded in the methods section of his paper?
Guide On Rating System
Vote
1. Henryk is not obligated to share his database with Mary before publication as he is the primary investigator and has the right to control the use and dissemination of the data he has collected. After publication, Henryk may choose to share the database with others outside his lab, but this is not required.
2. The ownership of the database is likely tied to the institution where the research was conducted. However, this may vary depending on the specific agreements between Henryk and the institution or funding agency such as the NIH.
3. Sharing a dataset with others who have collected it can be beneficial as it promotes collaboration, transparency, and the advancement of scientific knowledge. By allowing others to access and analyze the data, new insights and discoveries can be made. However, sharing a dataset can also be risky as it opens the possibility of someone else using the data for their own benefit without properly acknowledging or crediting the original data collectors.
4. Yes, Henryk is obligated to document how data points were included or excluded in the methods section of his paper. This is important for transparency and reproducibility in scientific research. By clearly stating the criteria for including or excluding data points, other researchers can assess the validity and reliability of the findings.
Got a question with my answer?
Cheapmath.com is completely free!
Asking question is free.
Getting answers is free.
+99