Core Points - The Chinese Association for Science and Technology announced the revocation of awards from five individuals, including Liu Jianni, due to violations of scientific integrity [1][4] - Liu Jianni's award, the China Young Female Scientist Award, was granted in 2014, and her university still has promotional articles celebrating her achievement [1][6] Group 1 - The announcement stated that awardees Zhou Xinyuan, Chen Zheyu, Sun Beicheng, Zhao Yuanjin, and Liu Jianni were found to have engaged in misconduct [4] - The decision to revoke the awards was made to maintain the honor, authority, and seriousness of the awards [4] - Liu Jianni was involved in unethical practices during project evaluations, including soliciting questions from experts and leaking evaluation results [5] Group 2 - Liu Jianni's specific misconduct included asking multiple experts for information before a project defense and disclosing her identity as a reviewer to assist applicants [5] - The National Natural Science Foundation of China decided to revoke Liu Jianni's project funding and impose a three-year ban on her application eligibility and a five-year ban on her reviewer qualifications [5] - As of September 19, 2023, Liu Jianni's profile and achievements were still publicly available on her university's website [6]

Core Viewpoint - The article highlights the increasing prevalence of academic misconduct in Chinese medical institutions, particularly involving the buying and selling of research data, which has led to significant concerns regarding the integrity of scientific research in the healthcare sector [1][2][3]. Group 1: Academic Misconduct Cases - The National Natural Science Foundation of China recently reported 21 cases of academic misconduct, with several involving the sale of experimental research data, primarily occurring in hospitals and medical schools [1]. - A notable case involved a urology department head at a prestigious hospital who was found to have engaged in data trading related to a study on prostate cancer cell proliferation [1]. - The foundation has established a reporting channel for academic misconduct, and there has been increased public awareness and scrutiny of "problematic papers" in hospitals [1]. Group 2: Issues in Research and Publication - A recent incident at Shandong University Qilu Hospital revealed a paper claiming to address "male uterine fibroid patients," which prompted an investigation and subsequent disciplinary action against the involved nurse [2]. - The journal "Chinese Medical Guidelines" acknowledged flaws in its review process that allowed for the publication of fraudulent papers, leading to the dismissal of an editor and the implementation of corrective measures [2]. - Experts attribute the rise of "paper mills" to the rigid evaluation standards and inadequate reward systems in hospitals, where some doctors resort to academic misconduct to meet publication demands [2][3]. Group 3: Quality of Research Output - Despite the high volume of papers published by Chinese doctors annually, the number of high-quality, impactful studies remains low, resulting in wasted national research funding [4]. - Some hospitals are beginning to incorporate public education as a performance metric, providing alternative pathways for career advancement beyond traditional publication metrics [4]. - The emergence of "popular science" doctors on social media platforms is seen as a double-edged sword, with some viewing it as a means to enhance public health awareness, while others criticize it as a distraction from clinical and research responsibilities [4]. Group 4: Institutional Perspectives - While some hospitals encourage doctors to engage in public education, emphasizing its potential benefits for both personal and institutional growth, others maintain that scientific research should remain the primary focus, with public outreach not substituting for academic publications [5].

Core Viewpoint - The article highlights the prevalence of academic misconduct in Chinese hospitals, particularly in the context of research papers, and discusses the shift towards valuing public education and outreach as part of the evaluation criteria for medical professionals [1][4]. Group 1: Academic Misconduct - The National Natural Science Foundation of China reported 21 cases of research misconduct, including data trading, primarily occurring in hospitals and medical schools [1][3]. - A notable case involved a urology department head at a prestigious hospital, whose paper on prostate cancer cell proliferation was flagged for data trading [1]. - The foundation has consistently addressed academic misconduct, with hospitals being significant sources of problematic papers [1][4]. Group 2: Institutional Responses - Shandong University Qilu Hospital responded to public complaints about a paper that incorrectly included male patients with uterine fibroids, leading to disciplinary actions against the involved nurse [3]. - The journal "Chinese Medical Guide" acknowledged flaws in its review process that allowed for the publication of fraudulent papers and has since taken corrective measures [3]. Group 3: Shift in Evaluation Criteria - Experts suggest that the rise of "paper factories" is linked to rigid evaluation standards in hospitals, where some doctors resort to misconduct to meet publication requirements [4]. - There is a growing trend among hospitals to incorporate public education as a metric for evaluating doctors, aiming to alleviate the "paper-only" assessment culture [1][4]. - Some hospitals are now promoting "science popularization" as a means for doctors to enhance their careers, which can also attract more patients [5]. Group 4: Public Engagement and Perception - The emergence of "science popularization" influencers among doctors is seen as a double-edged sword, with some viewing it as a way to improve public health awareness while others criticize it as a distraction from clinical and research responsibilities [5]. - Private hospitals are increasingly favoring "popular science" doctors for their ability to attract patient traffic, indicating a shift in hiring practices [5]. - However, some institutions maintain that traditional research output remains the primary focus, emphasizing the importance of publishing in recognized academic journals over social media platforms [5].

Core Points - The National Natural Science Foundation of China has taken action against over 20 scholars for scientific misconduct, issuing public criticism [1] - Specific cases include He Juliang from a university in Guangxi, who was penalized for buying and selling experimental research data and using others' names without consent, resulting in the revocation of his funding project and a three-year ban on applying for funding [1] - Other scholars and institutions involved have also faced corresponding penalties for various types of scientific misconduct [1]