Yes	No	In part
In general, a research integrity investigation should
Interview the appropriate individuals	□	□	□
Secure the relevant factual data that are reviewed by appropriate experts	□	□	□
Identify appropriate questions to pursue and use a meaningful approach to securing the answers	□	□	□
Have sufficient scope to address the scientific integrity issues	□	□	□
Investigative Committee
The Investigative Committee (the Committee) should have membership appropriate to the task	□	□	□
The Committee should include at least 1 cardiothoracic surgeon or other cardiothoracic investigator, conversant with the research area	□	□	□
The Committee should include at least 1 member with expertise in the area who is external to the responsible institution	□	□	□
The charge to the committee should be clear	□	□	□
Conflicts of interest of Committee members should be solicited and reported	□	□	□
Standards of due process and confidentiality should be followed	□	□	□
The respondent should have an opportunity to identify conflicts among Committee members	□	□	□
The investigative committee should have access to all necessary expertise or resources for a thorough investigation	□	□	□
Evidence of misconduct
Evidence relevant to the allegation should be properly sequestered and protected from tampering	□	□	□
The evidence considered in the investigation should be clearly described	□	□	□
The respondent should be offered an opportunity to reply to the allegations and the report	□	□	□
The Committee should consider and address whether important evidence was unavailable to them	□	□	□
If seemingly pertinent evidence was not reviewed, an explanation should be provided	□	□	□
A need for further evidence or additional analysis should be determined	□	□	□
A list of individuals who were interviewed should be provided	□	□	□
A list of others who should have been but were not interviewed should be provided, along with the reasons for not interviewing	□	□	□
Additional questions that should have been asked or evidence examined to reach a supportable conclusion should be considered	□	□	□
The report
An executive summary should be included	□	□	□
Relevant institutional policies should be articulated and applied to the allegations	□	□	□
The report should be written in clear and understandable language	□	□	□
The allegations should be clearly presented	□	□	□
The scope of the investigation should be sufficient to address the scientific integrity issues	□	□	□
The report should clearly state its findings and its conclusions	□	□	□
The report’s findings should support its conclusions	□	□	□
The report and its findings should be made available to all relevant parties	□	□	□

^aAdapted from Gunsalus et al. [6].