Whistleblowing and retractions concerning Iran-affiliated medical research: motives and editorial perspectives.
- 1Department of Bacteriology, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran.
- 2Department of Bacteriology, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran. [email protected].
Abstract
Research integrity underpins credible scientific research. Whistleblowing on research fraud, including data falsification, fabrication, and plagiarism, is critical for identifying flawed publications. Here, we investigated whistleblowers' roles in the retraction of Iran-affiliated, medically related publications between 2014 and 2024 and documented whistleblowers' motives and journal editors' perspectives. We used a structured questionnaire to interview 18 whistleblowers, 10 members of editorial boards, and four editors-in-chief. We identified three dominant whistleblower motives: commitment to academic integrity and ethics, frustration with institutional inaction, and, in some cases, retaliation or grievances. Whistleblowers express their vulnerability in high-risk environments, consistently reporting fear of legal, professional, or personal retaliation. Editors reported that they relied on whistleblowers to identify misconduct and acknowledged that assessing motives and navigating the Iranian institutional bureaucracy were difficult. Both groups highlighted that participants perceived ineffective ethics committees and insufficient protection measures as contributing to an environment conducive to misconduct. The findings suggest that whistleblowers are perceived as indispensable gatekeepers of integrity, and that a complex interplay of moral obligations, personal grievances, and institutional inadequacies may drive them to report transgressions. Based on these findings, we suggest that transparent editorial protocols, secure reporting mechanisms, whistleblower protections, enhanced institutional oversight, and culturally aware international interactions may represent useful considerations for safeguarding research integrity in complex academic environments.
Related
- Editorial: Unveiling the complexity of neuroendocrine neoplasms: biomarkers, classification, and translational perspectives
- Editorial: Perspectives in fungal pathogenesis: 2025
- Socio-clinical profiles and life satisfaction (LS) in individuals with emerging cognitive disorders (MCI or iSCCs) a multicenter cross-sectional study in French university-affiliated memory clinics
- Evaluation of safety standards in the operating rooms of educational hospitals affiliated with Golestan University of medical sciences in 2025: A cross-sectional study
- Parents perceptions and acceptability of the human papillomavirus vaccine in rural Zambia: a descriptive phenomenological study at Kabompo Hospital Affiliated Health Centre
BibTeX
@article{zamani2026whistleblowing,
title = {{Whistleblowing and retractions concerning Iran-affiliated medical research: motives and editorial perspectives.}},
author = {Seyedeh Kimia Zamani and Amin Talebi Bezmin Abadi},
journal = {BMC medical ethics},
year = {2026},
month = jul,
doi = {10.1186/s12910-026-01560-x},
url = {https://europepmc.org/article/MED/42907843},
note = {CC BY-NC-ND},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Whistleblowing and retractions concerning Iran-affiliated medical research: motives and editorial perspectives.
AU - Seyedeh Kimia Zamani
AU - Amin Talebi Bezmin Abadi
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/07/01
JO - BMC medical ethics
DO - 10.1186/s12910-026-01560-x
UR - https://europepmc.org/article/MED/42907843
AB - Research integrity underpins credible scientific research. Whistleblowing on research fraud, including data falsification, fabrication, and plagiarism, is critical for identifying flawed publications. Here, we investigated whistleblowers' roles in the retraction of Iran-affiliated, medically related publications between 2014 and 2024 and documented whistleblowers' motives and journal editors' perspectives. We used a structured questionnaire to interview 18 whistleblowers, 10 members of editorial boards, and four editors-in-chief. We identified three dominant whistleblower motives: commitment to academic integrity and ethics, frustration with institutional inaction, and, in some cases, retaliation or grievances. Whistleblowers express their vulnerability in high-risk environments, consistently reporting fear of legal, professional, or personal retaliation. Editors reported that they relied on whistleblowers to identify misconduct and acknowledged that assessing motives and navigating the Iranian institutional bureaucracy were difficult. Both groups highlighted that participants perceived ineffective ethics committees and insufficient protection measures as contributing to an environment conducive to misconduct. The findings suggest that whistleblowers are perceived as indispensable gatekeepers of integrity, and that a complex interplay of moral obligations, personal grievances, and institutional inadequacies may drive them to report transgressions. Based on these findings, we suggest that transparent editorial protocols, secure reporting mechanisms, whistleblower protections, enhanced institutional oversight, and culturally aware international interactions may represent useful considerations for safeguarding research integrity in complex academic environments.
SN - 1472-6939
ER -