Bangladesh Journal of Bioethics <p>Official Journal of the Bangladesh Bioethics Society. Full text articles available.</p><p>Bangladesh Journal of Bioethics is included on <a title="DOAJ" href="" target="_blank">DOAJ</a>.</p> Bangladesh Bioethics Society (BBS) en-US Bangladesh Journal of Bioethics 2226-9231 <p>(c) Bangladesh Journal of Bioethics.  </p><p><a href="" rel="license"><img style="border-width: 0;" src="" alt="Creative Commons Licence" /></a><br />Articles in the Bangladesh Journal of Bioethics are Open Access articles published under the Creative Commons CC BY-NC-ND License <a href="" rel="license">Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>. This license permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, is not changed in any way, and is not used for commercial purposes.</p> Editorial for special issue on publication ethics, March 2018 <p>Dear Readers,</p><p>Happy Summer Holidays for all of us up in the Northern Hemisphere.  While we are basking in the warmth of sunny days our friends in Australia are buying winter clothes. How strange is this world! And stranger are the creations who are supposed to look after all other organic and inorganic objects in this planet and maybe beyond. The simple virtues of ethical and value based behavior is often forgotten when we are focus on getting the best for ourselves without thinking or respecting the rights of others. The case of ethics in publication is not any different. We have few papers this issue but they are of extreme value and relevance:</p> Tahera Ahmed ##submission.copyrightStatement## 2018-07-03 2018-07-03 9 1 10.3329/bioethics.v9i1.37301 MacchiariniGate: The Fall from Grace of Stem Cell Healer, Paolo Macchiarini, and Clues and Concerns from the Early Literature that Cast Ethical Doubts <div class="WordSection1"><p><strong></strong>After a long and successful career in tracheal surgery and lung cancer, Paolo Macchiarini became very famous in 2008 with the transplantation of a trachea from a cadaver that then apparently used the patient’s own stem cells to supposedly regenerate new trachea, i.e., tissue-engineered tracheae. Among the nine patients that received this revolutionary treatment, using biological or artificial tracheae, under Macchiarini’s supervision, six have reportedly died. Although several critics had expressed concerns with the procedures, allegations of misconduct against Macchiarini first arose in August of 2014 by four Karolinska Institutet (KI) colleagues, and an independent investigation was called for by KI based on claims made in seven published papers. Among the claims were the fact that the procedure constituted a high risk, information on the patients was incomplete and that there was no or incomplete ethical approval, thus constituting misconduct. His CV was also shown to contain inaccuracies. By September 10, 2016, most of these claims have now proved to be true, and Macchiarini was found guilty of misconduct by KI. This paper looks primarily at earlier published papers by Macchiarini and his collaborators in a search for clues to better understand the evolution of altruism, or narcissism. An assessment of the controversial papers, and of letters written by critics and skeptics like Pierre R. Delaere, indicate that insufficient experimental evidence was presented for several case studies, and that claims made about the success of the procedures exceeded what was shown by the evidence. A domino effect of personal and professional tragedies ensued, in rapid succession, between 2014 and 2016. The effect on the field of stem cell research has been chilling, and the side-effects have taken their toll, with several high-profile resignations, primarily at KI, within the Swedish education system and in the Nobel Committee. This case has mesmerized the bioethics and biomedical communities for years.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p></div><strong><br clear="all" /> </strong> Jaime A. Teixeira da Silva ##submission.copyrightStatement## 2018-07-03 2018-07-03 9 1 1 12 10.3329/bioethics.v9i1.37103 Peer Review system: A Systematic Review <div class="WordSection1"><p>Peer review process helps in evaluating and validating of research that is published in the journals. U.S. Office of Research Integrity reported that data fraudulence was found to be involved in 94% cases of misconduct from 228 identified articles between 1994–2012. If fraud in published article are significantly as high as reported, the question arise in mind, were these articles peer reviewed?  Another report said that the reviewers failed to detect 16 cases of fabricated article of Jan Hendrick Schon. Superficial peer reviewing process does not reveals suspicion of misconduct. Lack of knowledge of systemic review process not only demolish the academic integrity in publication but also loss the trust of the people of the institution, the nation, and the world. The aim of this review article is to aware stakeholders specially novice reviewers about the peer review system. Beginners will understand how to review an article and they can justify better action choices in dealing with reviewing an article.</p><p class="yiv9492901424gmail-p1"><strong></strong><br /><strong> </strong></p></div><strong><br clear="all" /> </strong> Shamima Parvin Lasker ##submission.copyrightStatement## 2018-07-03 2018-07-03 9 1 13 23 10.3329/bioethics.v9i1.37104 Basic Concept of Intellectual property Rights (IPRs) <p><strong></strong><strong></strong>Intellectual property Rights (IPRs) is protected by different systems of laws. Journals must choose a definitive form of systems. Some Blackwell journals use copyright system and some Blackwell use license from authors. Now a days online journals are using creative common licenses.  Under creative common license<em> </em>journals are open access, allowed to download, copy, distribute, and display derivative works with proper attribution to author or owner for noncommercial purpose at a free cost<em>.</em> Education on IPRs will support to comprehend ones rights, professional code of conduct and the doctrine of "fair use" in publication. One cannot do anything with once writing. Researchers, academic, editors and readers must have the basic knowledge on who owns the rights in a publication and what users can do with the publication by law.</p><p class="Default"><strong> </strong></p><p class="Default">            </p> Arif Hossain ##submission.copyrightStatement## 2018-07-03 2018-07-03 9 1 24 28 10.3329/bioethics.v9i1.37219