Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer


Vol. 151 No. 3940 (2021)

New Swiss guidelines on scientific integrity: a step in the right direction, but still not enough

  • Roberto  Andorno
Cite this as:
Swiss Med Wkly. 2021;151:w30074


  1. Swiss Academies of Arts and Sciences. Code of conduct for scientific integrity. Bern: Swiss Academies of Arts and Sciences; 2021.
  2. Broad W, Wade N. Betrayers of the Truth. Fraud and Deceit in the Halls of Science. New York: Simon and Schuster; 1982.
  3. Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG). Guidelines for Safeguarding Good Research Practice; 2019.
  4. Max-Planck-Society. Rules of Good Scientific Practice & Rules of Procedure in Cases of Suspected Scientific Misconduct; 2009.
  5. US National Academy of Sciences. Integrity in Scientific Research. Creating an Environment That Promotes Responsible Conduct. Washington DC: The National Academies Press; 2002.
  6. Resnik D. From Baltimore to Bell Labs: Reflections on Two Decades of Debate about Scientific Misconduct. Accountability in Research. 2003; 10:123-135, at 132.
  7. ICMJE (International Committee of Medical Journal Editors). Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals, 2019.
  8. Battisti WP, Wager E, Baltzer L, Bridges D, Cairns A, Carswell CI, et al.; International Society for Medical Publication Professionals. Good publication practice for communicating company-sponsored medical research: GPP3. Ann Intern Med. 2015 Sep;163(6):461–4. Available from:
  9. Swiss Academies of Arts and Sciences. Authorship in scientific publications: analysis and recommendations. Bern: Swiss Academies of Arts and Sciences; 2013.
  10. World Health Organization. Whistleblowing and protection against retaliation. Policy and procedures. Geneva: WHO; 2015.