The essential link between publishers, librarians and researchers.

 
Recent
Latest Issue
RI Yearbook

Addressing the tarnished image of science

Leslie McIntosh

Leslie McIntosh explains why research integrity is crucial for upholding society and a healthy democracy

In my role as Vice President of Research Integrity at Digital Science, my focus is on enhancing research quality, combating disinformation, and fostering trust in science.

My educational background includes a PhD in public health, with specialisations in epidemiology and biostatistics, followed by a transition into biomedical informatics.

At the conclusion of my academic career I founded a company called Ripeta, aimed at improving research integrity and quality; in 2020, Ripeta was acquired by Digital Science. 

I have delivered hundreds of presentations, including talks at the US National Institutes of Health (NIH), NASA, and the World Congress on Research Integrity. I have provided consultation services to the governments of the United States, Canada, Australia, and several European nations.

The inspiration

I was led to research integrity through my role as the Director of the Center for Biomedical Informatics at Washington University School of Medicine. At that time, we were aggregating medical records and clinical research information, which required establishing rigorous oversight due to the sensitive and legally protected nature of the data we were working with. 

I wanted researchers to incorporate reproducible methods into their processes and to ensure that our work was recognised through citations. This was particularly challenging because, at the time, people did not typically cite data – although this has improved significantly since then. To achieve these goals, I had to deepen my understanding of data and research integrity.

What keeps me engaged in this field is a more philosophical perspective. I believe that science forms the foundation of society and a healthy democracy, and that the integrity of science is crucial to uphold both of these pillars. 

While scholarly research has become more accessible, the factors that inspire trust in science have not evolved at the same pace. We have not yet established clear guidelines for how we should trust scientific findings, which has led to superficial solutions. It is my strong desire to address and improve this situation.

Defining integrity

Research integrity isn’t just about the research itself or how it’s conducted – it’s also about the entire system that facilitates research communication, consumption, and trust. For research to be truly reliable, the system that supports it must function effectively.

I think of integrity like a well-built bridge; it must be solid yet flexible, complete yet designed with necessary gaps to withstand both human and natural forces. But unlike a bridge, which is a finished structure, science is inherently dynamic – a process of messy ideas that must be rigorously tested against well-formed assumptions.

At its core, research integrity is the pursuit of truth and understanding, grounded in rigour and honesty. It’s about ensuring that both individual research practices and the broader system uphold transparency, accountability, and trust.

Sticking to principles

Beyond the well-known challenges, the publishing industry needs to take a clear stance on its priorities and stick with it. If the goal is to uphold trust in science – along with the struggles and responsibilities that come with it – then publishers must fully commit to those principles. From my view, this is where publishers should be.

Furthermore, the scholarly community must place greater emphasis on scholarly communication. We no longer operate in isolation (if we ever did) and cannot ignore the fact that our ideas and discoveries may be utilised for both good and bad purposes. The publishing industry is a business that is being exploited by paper mills and weaponised for political ends, which is not surprising. Scholarly communications and communicators need to get in front of these conversations.

A proactive solution

The pressing question is: what can we do about it? Given the recent challenges in science – including the reproducibility crisis and the proliferation of paper mills – it ultimately comes down to trust in the author of the scholarship, above all else.

Trust in research starts with trust in the people conducting it. There’s a natural feedback loop – strong research enhances an author’s reputation – but, right now, that loop is being disrupted. The publishing industry is being overwhelmed by dodgy practices, from paper mills to plagiarism, polluting the scholarly record with unreliable work.

My role at Digital Science allows inspection and understanding of where the global community is regarding trust and mistrust and what is needed in this space. The ideas become products through detective work to understand quality and manipulation in science, a case at a time, and then through determining how we scale these checks to look across millions of data points. That leads to what we recently launched at Digital Science – Dimensions Author Check.

What excites me most about Dimensions Author Check is that it offers a proactive solution. Instead of just reacting to integrity issues after the fact, we now have a way to prevent the influx of low-quality or fraudulent research from bloating the scholarly corpus.

Dimensions Author Check is a powerful tool that enables publishers and institutions to verify authorship, strengthen editorial workflows, and protect reputations. It allows users to quickly explore a researcher’s publishing history by searching names or DOIs – saving valuable time, especially when evaluating larger groups, such as contributors to a special issue.

Beyond efficiency, the tool plays a critical role in mitigating reputational risks by flagging potential integrity concerns before they escalate. In an era where research integrity is under attack, this kind of data-driven transparency is essential for restoring and maintaining trust in the scientific record.

Brighter future?

Currently, I am focused on forensic scientometrics (FoSci), and I take great pride in our community’s commitment to upholding the true essence of science. The FoSci declaration, which is open for individuals committed to research integrity to sign, is here 10.5281/zenodo.14500719 with a summary from NISO here https://www.niso.org/niso-io/2024/12/forensic-scientometrics-fosci-paris-declaration  

My greatest hope and expectation – and what I am actively working towards – is that we continue to highlight the remarkable achievements of science and technology. As scholars, we conduct exceptional work and uncover astonishing aspects of our universe. 

It is essential that we address the recent challenges that have tarnished the image of science while also celebrating the wonders (and the creative messiness) inherent in the process of discovery.

Leslie McIntosh is Vice President of Research Integrity at Digital Science.  Some of her recent work includes:

Do you want to read more content like this? SUBSCRIBE to the Research Information Newsline!

Back to top