It was last year as the notification of the research misconduct was directed against the institute’s deputy vice-chancellor Karin Dahlman-Wright. The case concerned eight scientific articles and the notification was relayed to the Gothenburg university, as it was considered inappropriate for the department to investigate the matter .
Oredlighetsrådet at the university of Gothenburg asked for an opinion from the Expert group for misconduct in research, which, in turn, requested an opinion of an external expert, professor Nils Billestrup, a lecturer at the university of Copenhagen.
to the Expert group the existence of bildmanipulation in five of the eight articles, which is also admitted by the authors, but some of the manipulation do not, or are unlikely to have impacted the study conclusions. In two of the articles are Karin Dahlman-Wright, who last author (see the facts). The current one, type Billestrup that it seems strange that Karin Dahlman-Wright had an eye on the article’s final version (which she claimed). The review shows that you can’t determine if bildmanipulationen was consciously made or not, but that it is less likely that it could be explained as an ”honest mistake”. When it comes to the other mean Billestrup that there is very strong evidence that it is lost, misplaced bildmanipulation and that it is very unlikely that they would have been by mistake. They seem to be made deliberately to embellish the data, he writes in his opinion.
All co-authors to the articles now have the opportunity to submit comments on the Nils Billestrups expert report after the Expert group for research misconduct, the research presents an opinion.
the DN has sought Karin Dahlman-Wright, and the institute’s chairman of the board Mikael Odenberg for a comment.
