The Greater Metropolitan Clinical Taskforce: an Australian model for clinician governance.

1 Gerber P. What can we learn from the Hwang and Sudbø affairs? Med J Aust 2006; 184: 632-635. 2 Altman LK. For science’s gatekeepers, a credibility gap. New York Times 2006 2 May; The Doctor’s World: 1. 3 Claxton LD. Scientific authorship. Part 1. A window into scientific fraud? Mutat Res 2005; 589: 17-30. 4 Van Der Weyden MB. Preventing and processing research misconduct: a new Australian code for responsible research [editorial]. Med J Aust 2006; 184: 430-431. 5 Fišter K. At the frontier of biomedical publication: Chicago 2005. BMJ 2005; 331: 838-840. 6 Katavi ́c V. Five-year report of Croatian Medical Journal’s Research Integrity Editor — policy, policing, or policing policy. Croat Med J 2006; 47: 220-227. 7 Huth EJ, Case K. The URM: twenty-five years old. Science Editor 2004; 27: 17-21. 8 International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. Uniform requirements for manuscripts submitted to biomedical journals: writing and editing for biomedical publication. 2006. Available at: http:// www.icmje.org (accessed May 2006). 9 Becker G. Crime and punishment: an economic approach. J Polit Econ 1968; 76: 169-217. 10 Magnus JR, Polterovich VM, Danilov DL, Savvateev AV. Tolerance to cheating: an analysis across countries. J Econ Educ 2002; 33: 125-135. 11 Brice J, Bligh J. Author misconduct: not just the editors’ responsibility. Med Educ 2005; 39: 83-89. 12 Maruši ́c M, Maruši ́c A. Good editorial practice: editors as educators. Croat Med J 2001; 42: 113-120. ❏