What ethical principle is violated when a healthcare provider removes a case with complications from a research report on a new surgical procedure to make the results look better?

Medical Advisory BoardAll articles are reviewed for accuracy by our Medical Advisory Board
Educational purpose only • Exercise caution as content is pending human review
Article Review Status
Submitted
Under Review
Approved

Last updated: December 18, 2025View editorial policy

Personalize

Help us tailor your experience

Which best describes you? Your choice helps us use language that's most understandable for you.

Research Integrity Violation

The provider violated the ethical principle of Integrity (Answer C) by selectively removing a complication case from the research report to manipulate results.

Understanding the Violation

The act of removing the bleeding complication case constitutes selective reporting and data manipulation, which directly violates research integrity principles 1. This behavior represents intentional research misconduct through:

  • Selective reporting of results where findings with unfavorable impact were deliberately withheld from the final report 1
  • Biased and inconsistent reporting that leads to irreproducible results and erosion of public trust in science 1
  • Intentional breach of integrity that qualifies as research misconduct, not merely poor practice 2, 3

Why Integrity is the Correct Answer

Research integrity encompasses honesty, transparency, and respect for ethical standards throughout all stages of research, including data collection, analysis, and reporting 4, 5. The provider's action specifically violated:

  • The obligation for full disclosure of negative results, which is imperative in clinical trial reporting 1
  • The requirement that all adverse and unanticipated events must be reported in research 1
  • The fundamental principle that selective publication and selective reporting undermines the credibility of clinical research 1

Distinguishing from Other Principles

Beneficence and non-maleficence (options A and D) relate to maximizing benefits and minimizing harms to research participants during the conduct of the study 1. While the provider's action may ultimately harm future patients who receive biased information, the direct violation is the falsification of research data, not the treatment of the individual patient.

Research justice (option B) pertains to fair participant selection and equal access to research benefits and risks across populations 1. This scenario does not involve issues of participant selection or equitable distribution.

Critical Implications

This type of misconduct has devastating effects on the acceptance of clinical trial results and brings all research under scrutiny 1. The consequences include:

  • Irreproducible results and substantial waste of resources 1
  • Impaired study validity that may lead to patients suffering unnecessarily 1
  • Loss of public trust in the scientific enterprise 1, 4
  • Potential for medical license restriction or revocation when discovered 6

The Broader Context

Research misconduct is far more common than generally perceived and is often driven by incentives to pursue publications for career advancement 7. The scientific community must recognize that where research integrity ends, research misconduct starts 3, and intentional breaches like selective data removal constitute serious violations requiring institutional reporting and disciplinary action 1.

References

Guideline

Guideline Directed Topic Overview

Dr.Oracle Medical Advisory Board & Editors, 2025

Research

The Quest for Clarity in Research Integrity: A Conceptual Schema.

Science and engineering ethics, 2019

Research

Research Integrity: Where We Are and Where We Are Heading.

Journal of Korean medical science, 2023

Research

Research Integrity definitions and challenges.

Journal of clinical epidemiology, 2024

Guideline

Social Media Posting by Healthcare Professionals

Praxis Medical Insights: Practical Summaries of Clinical Guidelines, 2025

Professional Medical Disclaimer

This information is intended for healthcare professionals. Any medical decision-making should rely on clinical judgment and independently verified information. The content provided herein does not replace professional discretion and should be considered supplementary to established clinical guidelines. Healthcare providers should verify all information against primary literature and current practice standards before application in patient care. Dr.Oracle assumes no liability for clinical decisions based on this content.

Have a follow-up question?

Our Medical A.I. is used by practicing medical doctors at top research institutions around the world. Ask any follow up question and get world-class guideline-backed answers instantly.