1. The Darsee Case Duquesne University Undergraduate Research Program Ethics Forum June 25, 2012 Sarah Richards, Ryan Parker, Kelly Pham, Katie Ratay, TJ Rohrabaugh 1

2. Introduction - John Darsee was a rising star in cardiology with a seemingly bright future ahead of him Harvard University Colleagues caught him forging data - Undergraduate degree from Notre Dame - Medical degree from Indiana University in 1974 - Clinical work and research at Emory until 1979 2

3. Introduction - Research at Brigham and Women’s Hospital Dr. Eugene Braunwald → Noted physician at head of medicine at Brigham and Women’s Hospital and Beth Israel Hospital - Worked over 90 hours a week, 100 publications over 14 years 3

4. Introduction - 1981, colleagues told Braunwald that Darsee had been mislabeling experiments Put labels on experiments reading 24 seconds, 72 hours, one week, two weeks → Only minutes had passed - Braunwald rescinded the offer of Assistant Professor from Darsee - Terminated his research appointments with Brigham and Women’s Hospital 4

5. Introduction - Braunwald launched an investigation Found nothing - Darsee had been working in a multi-institutional project funded by the NIH Darsee’s work was substantially different from other research Duke and Johns Hopkins - Harvard, NIH, Emory each convened separate committees 5

6. Ethical Issues and Values Ryan Parker 6

7. Ethical Issue - Fraud Fabrication of data, findings, plagiarism, deliberate distortion of actual data 7

8. Evidence - Darsee’s amazing publication rate Over 100 abstracts & papers throughout short career Raises suspecions - Robert A. Kloner & Edward Brown Coauthor & Lab Technician Mislabeling of hemodynamic experiments - Admission to fault 8

9. How? - Braunwald: “The reason we have complete confidence is that the raw data were inspected at the most fundamental level at the time they were gathered. After 18 months or so it is not custom to hold onto a fellow’s hand at every turn” Lack of Supervision in lab - Braunwald’s Time conflicts - Allowed Darsee to continue 9

10. Why? - Institutional Pressures - Personal Professional Gain - Previously pulled it off Notre Dame - Outstanding record awed mentors 10

11. Consequences and Outcomes 11 TJ Rohrabaugh and Katie Ratay

12. Darsee’s Outcomes - He was not allowed to receive NIH funding for a 10 year period - The offer of a faculty position at Harvard was withdrawn - He left the research field and became a critical care specialist - 52 of his papers and abstracts from his work at Emory were retracted - 30 of his papers and abstracts from his work at Harvard were retracted 12

13. Co-worker’s Outcome Culliton, B. Science. “Coping with Fraud: The Darsee Case”. April 1, 1983. 220, 31. 13

14. Co-worker’s Outcome - The NIH required that Brigham & Women’s Hospital refund $122,371 - Dr. Braunwald was placed under high scrutiny for how he ran his lab - The credibility of coauthors were brought under suspicion 14

15. Was this fair? - For Darsee Yes Lost of funding and his removal from the research field is just. - For his coauthors and fellow researchers Not really Just because someone they worked with was faking data does not mean they are at fault as well. However, Dr. Braunwald not informing the NIH of Darsee’s fraud was a poor choice 15

16. Consequences and Outcomes - Circumstances that may mitigate the culpability of violation: Darsee was overworked Too high of expectations/ too much competition The other research fellows were jealous and exaggerated Dr. Braunwald was overstretched and did not pay enough attention Darsee may not have been properly instructed on ethics

17. Consequences and Outcomes - People who suffered because of the ethical breach: Members of the labs where Darsee worked Dr. Braunwald People who co-authored with Darsee Other investigators on the NHLBI grant People who cited Darsee or used his findings as a basis for their own research People who recommended Darsee for career advancements People who suffer from heart disease

18. Consequences and Outcomes - Costs to Society: Heart disease is one of the number one killers in America and worldwide Darsee’s actions may cause the general public to question science in general Other people may have decided not to pursue careers in science because of Darsee Much of Darsee’s funding was through the federal government and therefore came from taxpayers

19. Recommendations 19 Kelly Pham

20. Recommendations - What actions should have been taken and by whom to prevent this ethical violation? Always question the situation. → The data being produced. → The exorbitant number of papers Darsee was producing in such a short period of time. Communication → Direct contact might have prevented Darsee from fabrication. → Or the fabrication might have been caught earlier. 20

21. Recommendations - Ways to prevent this sort of ethical violation from occurring again. Hold mandatory ethical conferences and workshops. Be firm and consistent; don’t play favorites. Two phenomena are associated with fraud: → Pressure → Unusually large amount of publications from a particular laboratory 21

22. Recommendations - Is this case still relevant? Most research provides the basis of medications and treatments. If the results are fabricated, people may be receiving treatment that won’t help them at all, maybe even hurt them. - Who benefits from knowing about this case? Anyone who conducts research or reads research papers. → We must hold ourselves to an ethical standard. → We can’t assume that the data is correct. 22

23. References - Altman, L.; Melcher, L. British Medical Journal. “Fraud in Science”. Jun 25, 1983. 286, 2003-2006. - American Association for the Advancement of Science. Science. “Harvard Delays in Reporting Fraud”. Jan 29, 1982. 215, 478- 482. - Broad, William J. New York Times. “Notorious Darsee Case Shakes Assumptions About Science”. June 14, 1983. - Culliton, B. Science. “Coping with Fraud: The Darsee Case”. April 1, 1983. 220, 31-35. - Kochan, C.; Budd, J. Journal of the American Society for Information Science. “The Persistence of Fraud in the Literature: The Darsee Case”. 1992. 43( 7 ), 488-493. 23