Scientific integrity and copyright in codes of professional ethics

Scientific integrity presupposes respect for ethical and legal principles for the design, development and publication of research. The objective of this study was to analyze compliance with Brazilian and international regulations on scientific integrity and copyright described in the codes of professional. It is a documentary and descriptive research in which 11 codes of ethics of regulated professions in the field of health and human sciences were selected and analyzed. The results show that the codes of professional ethics with the highest number of cited descriptors were the ones that best met the national and international norms on research ethics. There was, however, no code that adequately covered all the Brazilian and international standards used as reference for analysis. It was concluded that these documents should be reformulated with the objective of empowering professionals and researchers from different fields of knowledge to act in a way that respects scientific integrity and copyright.

Scientific integrity can be understood as respect for ethical and legal principles for the design, conduct and publication of research. It involves adherence to aspects such as impartiality of the researcher during the development of the research, legitimacy of the data used and results achieved, correct establishment of authorship and co-authorship, compliance with regulated copyrights and attention to the vulnerability of research participants, considering also the dignity of the human person and the risks and benefits to the actors involved. In addition, it is important that there is no conflict of interest between researchers, sponsors and study participants, so that the impartiality of the project is not impaired 1 .
These aspects were addressed by Resolution 466 of the Conselho Nacional de Saúde -CNS (National Health Council) of December 12, 2012 1 , published on June 13, 2013, which revoked Resolution CNS 196/1996 2 . This resolution deals with the guidelines and norms regulating human research, and should cover research from all areas of knowledge, including health and humanities. In practice, it is applied mainly to research in health sciences and does not cover the methodological specificities of other areas, especially studies with a qualitative design 3,4 .
The Resolution CNS 510 5 was published in 2016. It deals with the ethical specificities of researches in human and social sciences and others that use methods similar to the ones used in those fields, and is aimed at protecting the rights of study participants. This was the first Brazilian norm focused specifically on these areas 6 , which represents an achievement for research ethics. Adding to that legislation, we have the Law 9,610/1998 7 . It protects the author's rights on intellectual works, independent of registration, and it makes explicit the protection of scientific texts on its article 7º.
In scientific practice, legislation and ethics must act in an interconnected manner. The distinction between the two refers to the application, since noncompliance with the law provides sanctions, unlike ethical guidelines. However, codes of professional ethics, when regulated by a federal council capable of enforcing it, can determine penalties in case of non-observance of their rules, going from warnings to prohibition of the legal practice of the profession 8 .
In addition to Law 9,610/1998 7 , the report published by the Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico -CNPq (National Council for Scientific and Technological Development) in 2011 defines measures to curb plagiarism, self-plagiarism, improper inclusion of co-authorship and manipulation of information and results 9 . These precautions should be emphasised, in view of the increase in cases of retraction of articles published in scientific journals due to fraud and copyright infringement 10 , crime also provided for in article 184 of the Código Penal (Penal Code) 11 .
The importance of scientific production is increasing in Brazil. The country ranked 17th in the 2002 world ranking, reaching the 13th position in 2011 12 14 . It should be noted, however, that the scientific research indicators count the number of articles published and the number of citations, but not the quality of the works 15 . Thus, it is a favourable scenario for the production of articles in series in postgraduate, master's and doctoral institutions without the proper rigor of scientific integrity 16 .
In this context, ethics in research involving human beings becomes extremely relevant, especially with respect to vulnerable individuals or groups 17 . Vulnerability is characterised as a condition of persons or groups with diminished power of choice or even devoid of influence and neglected in the decision-making process, with several possible causes. These people are susceptible because of their difficulty of resisting the decisions of third parties, legally indicated as responsible 1 .
Even if the person is aware and able to choose, one must minimise their vulnerability by proving that they have understood the issues involved in research participation. It is essential that effective consent is provided for inclusion in the study. The mere signature of the form is not an indication that the potential participant understood the information or effectively consented to the procedures, since it is necessary to guarantee the recognition of the autonomy and dignity of the subject 8 .
The discussion of respect for the dignity of research participants was resumed in 1947 with the Nuremberg Code 18 . After World War II, international authorities realised the need to regulate research methods, taking into account that during the conflict scientific experiments were carried out in disagreement with human rights 19,20 . In the last 70 years, several national and international documents have emerged, which are constantly improved and regulated, especially by CNS committees 1,21,22 and international organisations such as the World Medical Association (WMA) 23 . International documents such as the Declaration of Helsinki 23 , originally written in 1964 with subsequent modifications, the last being in 2013, and the Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights (UDBHR) 24 , from 2005, were also developed. These are examples of international normative statements that provide in detail the need for prior and free consent of the participant of studies. They also include specific guidelines on the participation of persons unable to consent. The Berne Convention 25,26 written in 1886 and much revised, most recently in 1971 -covers the protection of scientific works on an international level. Its provisions were essential to reach consensus in the field of research ethics 27 .
Despite all these years of discussion about ethical principles in human experiences, there are still different degrees of protection of human beings as research subjects, which can be seen from the different approaches in depth and content of each code of professional ethics 28 . The effective orientation of each professional council to its members who act as researchers was analysed from the systematised reading of specific articles and chapters on the subject. This research was motivated by the lack of studies that relate ethics in research with human beings in the areas of health sciences and humanities to the respective codes of professional ethics, evidenced by the search in electronic databases with specific keywords for the theme of the study. The theme is relevant to discuss the need to consolidate specific ethical guidelines for the human sciences area, since Brazilian and international regulations were elaborated with reference to biomedical researches carried out in the health sciences 29 .
This study seeks to answer the following questions: Is scientific integrity and respect for copyrights included in the codes of ethics of the health sciences and humanities, promoting their application by professionals in researches with human beings? Are health and humanities professionals fully empowered by their class councils and codes of professional ethics and able to respect the vulnerability and dignity of research participants?

Goals
This article aimed to analyse aspects of scientific integrity related to research involving human beings and the copyrights described in the professional codes of ethics in health sciences and humanities. It also aimed to analyse compliance with the Brazilian and international regulations on scientific integrity by codes of professional ethics in health sciences (specifically medicine, nursing, speech and language therapy, physiotherapy and occupational therapy, nutrition, physical education, pharmaceutics and dentistry) and human (psychology, sociology and geography).

Method
Documentary, descriptive and qualitative research was carried out in which the professional codes of ethics in force were analysed by federal and national councils and scientific societies in the areas of health and human sciences, delimited by the classification of the CNPq published in 2011 30 . Codes drawn up by regional councils and associations are excluded, in order to standardise the analysis, whilst the codes of ethics of regulated professions were included. All other codes were excluded.
Eleven codes of professional ethics were analysed, focusing on the articles and chapters referring to human research. The following codes of health sciences were analysed: medicine (2009) 31 , dentistry (2012) 32 , pharmacy (2005) 33 , nursing (2007) 34 , nutrition (2018) 35 , speech and language therapy (2016) 36 , physiotherapy and occupational therapy (2013) 37 , and physical education (2015) 38 . The following codes of professional ethics were chosen from humanities: psychology (from 2005) 39 , sociology (2013) 40 , and geography (2014) 41 . It is important to point out that the code of ethics of medicine 31 is in the process of revision, with a new version expected to be published in 2019.
We chose to use as research method a systematised research in each professional code of ethics by category, including the descriptors: "autonomy", "beneficence", "confidentiality or secrecy", "informed consent", "research involving human beings" and "copyright". The results were described in a form specially prepared for this studying are reproduced in Tables 1 and 2, which systematise the collected information.
The aspects that appeared in each code were listed and related to Brazilian regulations and international declarations on research ethics in order to observe if there was correct adherence to the norms and binding guidelines of each document. National reference was taken, above all, from Law 9,610/1998 7 , which deals with copyright in Brazil, The results were analysed in light of publications included in the electronic databases Lilacs, Medline and PubMed. Articles published between 2002 and 2016 were considered, with the following terms being searched in Portuguese and in English: "scientific integrity and code of ethics" (or "codes of ethics"); "Copyright and codes of ethics"; "Ethics in human research and codes of ethics"; "Codes of ethics and professional ethics". Editorials and letters to the editor were excluded because they did not present scientific relevance for the discussion.

Results
This research included the analysis of codes of professional ethics in the area of human sciences and updated data collected in codes of professional ethics of health sciences. In addition, the codes have been evaluated for compliance with standards of a hierarchically superior nature -international declarations and norms of more specific content -resolutions and copyright legislation. It is also important to study the Brazilian codes of professional ethics, in view of the existence of research on codes from other countries.
It is worth mentioning that Resolution CNS 466/2012 1 was analysed under the light of the UDBHR 24 . It was concluded that the first deals specifically with the regulation of research involving human beings developed in Brazilian territory and is restricted to the daily practice of health professionals and researchers. On the other hand, the UDBHR is an international document of greater applicability and comprehensiveness 43 .
From the analysis of the documents, it was observed that the codes of ethics of medicine 31 , nursing 34 , physiotherapy and occupational therapy 37 , nutrition 35 , dentistry 32 , speech and language therapy 36 and pharmacology 33 have a chapter dedicated to research, which demonstrates the importance of the subject for these professional categories. As far as copyright is concerned, only the sociologist's code of ethics 40 presents an exclusive section on the subject, in which it deals with plagiarism. This subject is only mentioned by the codes of medical ethics 31 , nursing 34 , physiotherapy and occupational therapy 37 , nutrition 35 , dentistry 32 , speech and language therapy 36 , pharmacology 33 and sociology 40 . In the codes of medical ethics 31 , nursing 34 , nutrition 35 , physiotherapy and occupational therapy 37 , dentistry 32 , speech and language therapy 36 and sociology 40 there is reference to research ethics, while in the other four this was not observed.
From a specific analysis, it is highlighted that in the code of medical ethics 31 the autonomy of the subject of the research is discussed from the term of free and informed consent, recommended by Resolution CNS 466/2012 1 , in its item III.2, letter g, and the guidelines IX and X of the Cioms 42 . Patient autonomy is evidenced when addressing the choice of treatment, but there is no direct mention to the autonomy of the research subject, as established in guideline IX of the Cioms 42 . It is perceived that questions of confidentiality and secrecy need to be specifically addressed in human research, as indicated in item II.5 of Resolution CNS 466/2012 1 , article 24 of the Declaration of Helsinki 23 and in guideline XI of Cioms 42 . In general, the code of medical ethics complies with the normative provisions of the copyright law with specifications on the criteria of authorship.
The code of ethics of physiotherapy 37 , on the other hand, addresses beneficence, confidentiality and autonomy of the patient in the scope of professional practice, but does not mention research with human beings. Nevertheless, it refers to conflicts of interest that may arise in research, scientific integrity, and copyright. Finally, it also regulates compliance with specific legislation for scientific studies. The text lacks emphasis on the vulnerability of the research subject, as provided by Resolution CNS 466/2012 1 , in its item III.1, letter a. are directed to health research 44 . The code of ethics of the pharmacologist 33 cites autonomy and secrecy strictly related to professional practice. It is worth mentioning, however, that this code emphasises the protection of vulnerable individuals who participate in research, besides indicating the free and informed consent term. Copyright is also treated in order to contemplate Law 9,610/1998 7 .
The nursing ethics code 34 also duly refers to copyright, respecting Law 9,610/1998 7 and the Berne Convention 25,26 . In addition, it addresses the risks and damages to research participants and scientific integrity, making clear the importance of the subject for professionals in the category. It regulates that the identification of the patient in a study can only be divulged with the patient's authorisation, which demonstrates respect to article 24 of the Declaration of Helsinki 23 and to article 9 of the UDBHR 24 .
The code of ethics of psychologist 39 addresses professional secrecy in the context of everyday practice, but does not refer to research with human beings. It includes the term of free and informed consent, which shows concern about respect for the autonomy of the research volunteer. However, it does not refer to copyright, a fact that goes against specific legislation and the Berne Convention 25,26 .
The code of ethics of the speech and language therapist 36 addresses respect for ethical and legal norms and copyright, demonstrating the importance that these subjects assume for this category. It should be emphasised that the mere reference to the compliance with the ethical-legal norms on the practice of research does not exempt the code from the direct approach of the subject. In addition, the code brings consent for use of data or images, but it does not refer to free and informed consent for the development of research. Respect for privacy and confidentiality is referred to in a general way, without mention of confidentiality in research, as recommended by the guideline XI of the Cioms 42 .
The code of ethics of dentistry 32 deals with the preservation of the autonomy of the individuals in its preliminary dispositions, without specifying the participants of the researches. Beneficence is generally approached as to the exercise of the profession for the health of human beings, and the code deals with professional secrecy only. The term of free and informed consent and copyright are mentioned.
The code of ethics of nutritionists 35 addresses beneficence, respect for human beings involved in research, the need for approval by the Ethics and Research Committee, and copyright in the chapter devoted to research. It also deals with respect for autonomy and confidentiality but only in the context of everyday practices. Informed consent was not included in this code. As for the code of ethics of the physical educator 38 , aspects involved only in the exercise of the profession are mentioned and in a more pragmatic way, such as autonomy and professional secrecy. Research, ethics or copyright were not mentioned in any relevant way.
The sociology code of ethics was not included in Table 2 because it was organised in titles rather than in articles.

Discussion
As for scientific integrity, it could be verified that the research must be carried out based on the demands of priorities established by the scientific community and endorsed by the society in general. They should be developed observing ethical principles such as beneficence, autonomy, justice, confidentiality, privacy, legitimacy of data, transparency, among others. Relevant aspect relates to the correct indication of authorship and co-authorship as a way of preserving copyright. Their results should have social and scientific relevance, being directed to population groups with which the studies were carried out.
From the reading of previously selected scientific articles, it was found that the difficulties in adopting and maintaining principles related to scientific integrity and copyright are present in all continents, as evidenced by the countries of origin of the articles that deal with ethical transgressions: Brazil 15 Some aspects that hinder adherence to good scientific practices and the consequent integrity in science are conflicts of interest 50 , dispute of authorship 51 and various frauds, which are the main cause of retraction of articles by scientific journals 10. Added to these deviant behaviours is the lack of knowledge about the content of professional codes of ethics and their omission with respect to the protection of vulnerable participants 28 . In addition, few cases of scientific misconduct are effectively recorded, making it difficult to adopt educational and punitive measures 49 .
It was also observed that there are factors that influence the reduced adoption of good practices or enable conducts considered questionable in the scientific context. The first one is associated with academic competitiveness and the requirement of intellectual production based on the quantity of scientific publications, to the detriment of the quality of the researches and their products 16 . Another point would be researchers' understanding of their work environment. Those who perceive the existence of unfair treatment or who work excessively are more prone to scientific misconduct 52 .
Another cited aspect that interferes in the process was the early access of students to the content of codes of professional ethics and the strength of these documents in the ethical-legal formation of professionals 28 . Knowledge of ethical requirements for the practice of professions contributes to empowering professionals in different categories.
Analysis of the current panorama of scientific practice shows that there are difficulties in preserving research integrity and dissemination of results. Nevertheless, it is possible to list progress made in some areas of knowledge, as well as measures adopted to solve the problems indicated. Ideally, professionals and researchers should adopt behaviours and practices anchored in ethical requirements throughout their careers 53 .
Despite the incipient discussion on the subject in Brazil, it was possible to note the increase in the production of articles on scientific integrity from 2005 15 . With a view to responsible conduct in research, professional societies should carefully evaluate the needs and possible problems in their area and to offer resources to solve specific problems. In addition, they should play an active role in promoting integrity in research 54 .
As for the authorship dispute, it is recommended to establish agreements prior to the production of research and scientific articles on the order of authorship and co-authoring to be adopted in the publications and the responsibility of each one of the participants according to legal requirements, in order to avoid problems in the publication and subsequent need for retraction. Ownership of ideas is a complex subject because it brings together issues such as intellectual property, professional ethics and scientific progress for author, society and country 55 .

Final Considerations
This research showed that codes of professional ethics briefly address the ethical requirements that should support conducting research, dissemination of results and issues related to copyright. This is more frequent in the codes of ethics of the humanities, which reflects the lack of normative support for the professionals of the area. It is worth mentioning that this issue is important for both the health sciences professionals and the humanities.
In general, these codes have not provided adequate guidance regarding the development and publication of research, which goes against the provisions of international declarations, Brazilian legislation and regulations for the themes of research with human beings, scientific integrity and copyright. The codes address principles of autonomy and beneficence aimed at everyday work practice, but do not emphasise the duties of the professional as a researcher and adherence to the values and principles required for scientific integrity. It should be emphasised that, besides exercising work activities, the professionals of the categories considered in this article are also academics and researchers. They should, therefore, be guided by their professional councils regarding the ethical behaviour expected in the context of the scientific practice.
In this sense, this research sought to give subsidies so that councils and class societies can adapt their codes in order to emphasise the importance of the subject and enable its professionals regarding scientific integrity and copyright.