The result of both of these systems is considerable abuse: patents were created to encourage innovators to disclose their ideas to one another, and publications were created to share results and 'lessons learned' from one academic group to another. But then, measuring people on how much they publish, or measuring companies by how generic the patents they hold are, accomplishes the opposite: academics are encouraged to write as much garbage as they can, instead of focusing on major results. This is an intentional, contribution to information overload inherent in the current academic system, and (as this case demonstrates) no deterrent to falsifying results.
I'm not sure if this is a world record in fabricated results – it may be surprising in the anesthesiology department, but certain other research groups almost always present fabricated – or at least heavily manipulated – results, depending on who happens to be funding the research.
Research needs to be a non-partisan, independent branch, if we are indeed to learn anything from the results.
Anesthesiologist Fabricates 172 Papers | The Scientist
Anesthesiologist Fabricates 172 Papers |