Bulletin Page List
List official bulletin pages with extracted text from CAMPUSonline.
BulletinPage(id, bulletin, index, text, clean, harvest)
Filters
To filter for exact value matches:
?<fieldname>=<value>
For advanced filtering use lookups:
?<fieldname>__<lookup>=<value>
Possible lookups:
bulletin:gte,gt,lte,ltindex:gte,gt,lte,lt
GET /v1/campusonline/bulletin:page/?format=api&offset=22520
{ "count": 23726, "next": "https://api-test.medunigraz.at/v1/campusonline/bulletin:page/?format=api&limit=20&offset=22540", "previous": "https://api-test.medunigraz.at/v1/campusonline/bulletin:page/?format=api&limit=20&offset=22500", "results": [ { "bulletin": { "id": 12875, "academic_year": "2024/25", "issue": "15", "published": "2025-01-22T00:00:00+01:00", "teaser": "Richtlinie des Rektorates: „Standards für gute wissenschaftliche Praxis“ – Änderung; Geschäftsordnung Stabsstelle Interne Revision; Satzung: Satzungsteil A. Studienrechtliche Bestimmungen – Änderung; Satzung: Satzungsteil I. Wahlordnung – Änderung; Ausschreibung von Stellen", "url": "https://online.medunigraz.at/mug_online/wbMitteilungsblaetter_neu.display?pNr=12875&pDocNr=1590955&pOrgNr=1" }, "index": 19, "text": "20\n1. Purpose and scope of this document\nIntegrity is the fundamental principle and premise of all scientific work. It is necessary to produce\nvalid and high-quality research results, and it is required to gain the trust of members of society in\nthe areas of research, development and technology. In all scientific fields, therefore, research\nactivities are subject to certain basic and discipline-specific regulations, which range from ethical\nprinciples to detailed legal provisions (e.g. regulations on genetic engineering, animal\nexperimentation, clinical trials, intellectual property, human rights, data protection, and\nprovisions on financial and administrative matters).\nThe purpose of this document is:\n to define the standards of good scientific practice, whereby compliance with these is among the\n official duties of all those involved in research and is thus required, and\n to contribute to raising awareness of these standards to prevent cases of scientific misconduct\n or fraud.\nIn this guideline, medicine is presented from a holistic perspective. For this reason, the terms\n“medicine”, “research”, and “medical research” are used in this guideline to encompass all areas\nof research being carried out in both clinical and non-clinical fields, including approaches from the\nnatural sciences, nursing sciences, psychology, social sciences and other fields.\nIn this context, the persons involved in research include not only employees who are considered as\nmembers of scientific staff, but also – insofar as they participate in a research process – non-\nscientific staff (e.g. supporting staff), as well as students, KAGes employees at the LKH University\nHospital, visiting researchers, post-doctoral candidates who do not have an employment\nrelationship with the university and all other persons who participate in scientific work at the\nMedical University of Graz or or publish as affiliate of the Medical University of Graz.\nThese standards do not replace the existing legal regulations, ethical principles, or other standards\nthat apply to scientific work. Instead, they have been developed to encourage a high level of\nawareness about and commitment to good scientific practice. The standards also do not replace\nthe regulations of the Ethics Committee. Good scientific practice implies compliance with all\nrelevant laws, and especially those that protect the interests of patients and volunteers. Violations\nof the standards of good scientific practice may constitute breaches of duty or other violations of\nlegal regulations, which may have civil or criminal consequences.\n2. Standards for good scientific practice\n2.1 Definition and principles\nAccording to § 2a para. 2 of the Act on Quality Assurance in Higher Education (HS-QSG) as amended,\ngood scientific practice is compliance with legal regulations, ethical standards and the current\nstate of knowledge of the respective subject within the framework of the tasks and objectives of\nthe respective educational institution. Certain forms of non-compliance with good academic\npractice constitute academic misconduct.\nMitteilungsblatt vom 22.01.2025, StJ 2024/25, 15. Stk. RN96 Page 2 of 15" }, { "bulletin": { "id": 12875, "academic_year": "2024/25", "issue": "15", "published": "2025-01-22T00:00:00+01:00", "teaser": "Richtlinie des Rektorates: „Standards für gute wissenschaftliche Praxis“ – Änderung; Geschäftsordnung Stabsstelle Interne Revision; Satzung: Satzungsteil A. Studienrechtliche Bestimmungen – Änderung; Satzung: Satzungsteil I. Wahlordnung – Änderung; Ausschreibung von Stellen", "url": "https://online.medunigraz.at/mug_online/wbMitteilungsblaetter_neu.display?pNr=12875&pDocNr=1590955&pOrgNr=1" }, "index": 20, "text": "21\nStandards for good scientific practice represent a code of conduct for all persons involved in\nresearch, based on the following four principles in accordance with the “European Code of Conduct\nfor Research Integrity” created by All European Academies (ALLEA)1:\n Reliability in ensuring the quality of research, reflected in the design, the methodology, the\n analysis and the use of resources,\n Reliability in developing, undertaking, reviewing, reporting and communicating research in a\n transparent, fair, full and unbiased way,\n Respect for colleagues, research participants, society, ecosystems, cultural heritage and the\n environment,\n Accountability for the research from idea to publication, for its management and organisation,\n for training, supervision and mentoring, and for its wider impacts.\nThe general principles of good scientific practice are:\n to work lege artis, i.e. to conduct all research activities in accordance with the legal\n requirements, ethical principles and the state of the art in the respective field of work;\n to document results and procedures in a consistent, comprehensible and transparent manner and\n to retain or store all the primary data obtained;\n to review results critically;\n to adhere to a policy of strict honesty with regard to the contributions of partners, competitors\n and predecessors;\n to avoid and prevent scientific misconduct and fraud in one's own work and working environment;\n to take mutual responsibility for joint achievements when cooperating with another research\n group;\n to be aware of and comply with international, national, sectoral and institutional regulations\n that govern the working and training conditions (including conditions and regulations imposed by\n those providing financial support) and to obtain all necessary approvals before commencing the\n research in question; and\n to comply with the principles and regulations defined and described in detail in this guideline.\n2.2 Ghostwriting and plagiarism\nAccording to § 2a para. 3 no. 3 HS-QSG, ghostwriting occurs when someone makes unauthorized use\nof another person when writing a paper or taking an examination or makes use of work\ncommissioned from a third party.\nAccording to § 2a para. 3 no. 4 HS-QSG, plagiarism occurs if someone adopts texts, ideas or artistic\nworks in whole or in part and passes them off as their own, in particular if someone uses text\npassages, theories, hypotheses, findings or data by direct, paraphrased or translated adoption\nwithout identifying and citing the source and the author accordingly.\n2.3 Degrees of responsibility\nAll persons involved in research, regardless of whether they are employed by the university or\notherwise involved in research activities, agree to comply with the specific regulations and\n1\n “European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity, revised Edition 2023”, All European Academies\n(ALLEA), https://allea.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/European-Code-of-Conduct-Revised-Edition-\n2023.pdf (14 January 2025)\nMitteilungsblatt vom 22.01.2025, StJ 2024/25, 15. Stk. RN96 Page 3 of 15" }, { "bulletin": { "id": 12875, "academic_year": "2024/25", "issue": "15", "published": "2025-01-22T00:00:00+01:00", "teaser": "Richtlinie des Rektorates: „Standards für gute wissenschaftliche Praxis“ – Änderung; Geschäftsordnung Stabsstelle Interne Revision; Satzung: Satzungsteil A. Studienrechtliche Bestimmungen – Änderung; Satzung: Satzungsteil I. Wahlordnung – Änderung; Ausschreibung von Stellen", "url": "https://online.medunigraz.at/mug_online/wbMitteilungsblaetter_neu.display?pNr=12875&pDocNr=1590955&pOrgNr=1" }, "index": 21, "text": "22\nrequirements in their field of research and apply the standards of good scientific practice defined\nin this document.\nTo this effect, all persons involved in the research agree\n to comply with these standards in their own daily work,\n to set a good example for others, and especially for students and less experienced staff, and\n (if they are experienced or senior scientists) to familiarise students and less experienced staff\n with good scientific practice and teach them how to apply its principles.\nAll scientists are responsible for their behaviour and actions in the context of scientific work. All\nresearch group leaders are responsible for ensuring that their group fulfils the legal requirements\nand applies the principles of good scientific practice. Therefore, each research group leader is\nresponsible for ensuring that their group members are familiar with or are familiarised with the\nprinciples of good scientific practice and that a working environment exists or is created that allows\nthe group members to act accordingly. The leader must also ensure that all group members are\nwilling to openly discuss and critically review their hypotheses, theories and scientific data and\nresults.\n3. Data handling\nIn the context of good scientific practice, three aspects of data handling and data protection in\nparticular need to be considered:\n the legal and other requirements for data storage in the documentation of scientific work\n (section 3.1) and in clinical trials in accordance with the Medicinal Products Act and Medical\n Devices Law (see section 7),\n the applicable provisions on the protection of personal data (section 3.2) and\n the specifications provided for data management plans (DMPs) by research funding\n institutions (for example, FWF and the European Commission).\n3.1 Documentation of scientific work\nAll persons involved in research are responsible for ensuring that\n they document their own work in such a way that the research results can be reproduced on the\n basis of the information available in the documentation;\n their original materials, primary data and documentation are kept secure and accessible at Med\n Uni Graz for a period of ten years; and\n that these are made and remain accessible if they are or need to be archived outside of the\n person's own institution.\nEveryone involved in research must provide essential information in sufficient detail about how an\nexperiment is carried out, documenting this information in writing or electronically, such that\nindependent experts are able to reproduce this experiment. If experiments are based on\ncalculations, the documented information must be detailed such that another person can repeat\nthese calculations. Documentation (i.e. protocols and results) in written or electronic form must\nhave a continuous page numbering, a clear structure and always be complete. If data cannot be\nincluded in a laboratory notebook or an electronic protocol, the project documentation must\ninclude a precise and clearly understandable reference to the source or storage location.\nFurther regulations on research data management can be found in the University's Research Data\nManagement Policy.\nMitteilungsblatt vom 22.01.2025, StJ 2024/25, 15. Stk. RN96 Page 4 of 15" }, { "bulletin": { "id": 12875, "academic_year": "2024/25", "issue": "15", "published": "2025-01-22T00:00:00+01:00", "teaser": "Richtlinie des Rektorates: „Standards für gute wissenschaftliche Praxis“ – Änderung; Geschäftsordnung Stabsstelle Interne Revision; Satzung: Satzungsteil A. Studienrechtliche Bestimmungen – Änderung; Satzung: Satzungsteil I. Wahlordnung – Änderung; Ausschreibung von Stellen", "url": "https://online.medunigraz.at/mug_online/wbMitteilungsblaetter_neu.display?pNr=12875&pDocNr=1590955&pOrgNr=1" }, "index": 22, "text": "23\n3.2 Protection of personal data\nThe term personal data refers to both directly personal and indirectly personal (pseudonymised)\ndata that cannot be assigned to a specific person without providing further information.\nAnonymised data is data that cannot be assigned to a specific person by anyone. While directly\npersonal and pseudonymised data are subject to data protection, anonymised data are exempt\nfrom the Data Protection Act.\nThe Medical University of Graz “Data Protection and IT Security Guideline” regulates the conduct\nof all employees and explains how personal data should be handled in compliance with legal\nregulations. In particular, these include the EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), the\nData Protection Act (DPA), the Research Organisation Act (FOG, Federal Act on General Matters)\nand the data protection amendment laws enacted in compliance with the GDPR.\n3.3 Complying with the Copyright Act\nWhen using images and graphics from publications that appear in a scientific work (e.g. a\ndissertation, publication) or a scientific lecture, the provisions of the Copyright Act as amended\nregarding the protection of works and rights of use must be observed. An exception is granted by\ncertain Creative Commons licences (e.g. for open access journals), but the source (author) must\nalways be cited even in this case.\n4. Publications and authorship\n4.1 General principles\n In publications, the author(s) must describe materials, methods and results in enough detail that\n the readers can understand the approach used and understand and reproduce the experimental\n design. If the individual publishers or journals have restrictive requirements that limit the\n comprehensiveness of the description (e.g. by limiting the number of characters or words), this\n aspect must be taken into account as far as possible (e.g. by providing supplementary\n information). Previous work (that of the author(s) and of others) must be identified as such and\n cited completely and correctly.\n Authors of scientific publications are jointly responsible for the content of a manuscript.\n Authorship can only be granted to persons who have contributed substantially to the research in\n question (see section 4.2). “Honorary authorships” are not compatible with good scientific\n practice. Every author has the right and the responsibility to read the publication before it is\n published.\n If manuscripts are sent to an editor for publication in a journal, book, or collective work, the\n institutional affiliation and/or correspondence address must minimally contain the following\n information: [name of the author], [official name of the organisational unit (centre, institute,\n clinic, clinical department, and department chair (optional)], Medical University of Graz,\n [address of the organisational unit (if possible)].\n Authors must bear in mind that publishing or carrying out prior discussions about manuscripts or\n parts of manuscripts in social media can also be problematic, resulting in copyright infringements\n and limiting possible intellectual property rights, etc. For this reason, the possibility of posting\n information about manuscripts or parts of manuscripts in social media must be discussed with all\n authors ahead of time, they must all agree to this form of publication, and this form of\n publication must comply with the publisher's terms and conditions.\nMitteilungsblatt vom 22.01.2025, StJ 2024/25, 15. Stk. RN96 Page 5 of 15" }, { "bulletin": { "id": 12875, "academic_year": "2024/25", "issue": "15", "published": "2025-01-22T00:00:00+01:00", "teaser": "Richtlinie des Rektorates: „Standards für gute wissenschaftliche Praxis“ – Änderung; Geschäftsordnung Stabsstelle Interne Revision; Satzung: Satzungsteil A. Studienrechtliche Bestimmungen – Änderung; Satzung: Satzungsteil I. Wahlordnung – Änderung; Ausschreibung von Stellen", "url": "https://online.medunigraz.at/mug_online/wbMitteilungsblaetter_neu.display?pNr=12875&pDocNr=1590955&pOrgNr=1" }, "index": 23, "text": "24\n Under any circumstances, the consent of all authors involved must be obtained before the\n material is published in another form.\n All authors are required to disclose relationships that could be considered as sources of a\n potential conflict of interest.\n4.2 Criteria and responsibilities\nThe Medical University of Graz bases its authorship criteria on the recommendations provided by\nthe International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) 2, the Council of Science Editors\n(CSE) 3, the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) 4 and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) 5.\nBefore submitting a manuscript to a scientific journal, authors should first read and consider the\nauthorship criteria of the journal in question. The following minimum requirements for authorship\nmust be met:\n 1. The individual must make a substantial contribution to the conception and design of the\n study OR\n 2. they must make a substantial contribution to the collection, analysis and interpretation of\n the study data OR\n 3. to the formulation or critical revision of the article with regard to important intellectual\n content AND\n 4. they must have the opportunity to perform a final review of and approve the version to be\n published AND\n 5. all authors must consent to the disclosure of the study contributions (contributorship\n disclosure, i.e. the provision of a precise description of each author’s contribution to the\n study from the planning to the publication).\nAll persons designated as authors should meet criteria 1, 2, or 3 and must meet criteria 4 and 5\nunder all circumstances. All those who meet these criteria should be named as authors. Persons\nwho do not meet the above criteria but have provided a contribution to the work should be listed\nin the Acknowledgements.\nActivities which do not individually justify authorship:\n 1. The provision of space and infrastructure (i.e. substantial intellectual contribution to the\n publication not provided);\n 2. The implementation of a study and collection of data using routine methods without being\n involved in the interpretation of the data; or\n 3. The general management of a research group without providing an intellectual contribution\n to publication or the general management of an organisational unit or sub-organisational\n unit.\n2\n Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in\nMedical Journals (updated December 2017), International Committee of Medical Journal Editors,\nhttp://www.icmje.org/recommendations/ (14 January 2025)\n3\n White Paper on Publication Ethics. 2.2. Authorship and Authorship Responsibilities, Council of\nScience Editors (CSE), https://www.councilscienceeditors.org/2-2-authorship-and-authorship-\nresponsibilities (14 January 2025)\n4\n Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), https://publicationethics.org/ (14 January 2025)\n5\n NIH, General Guidelines for Authorship Contributions,\nhttps://oir.nih.gov/sites/default/files/uploads/sourcebook/documents/ethical_conduct/guidelin\nes-authorship_contributions.pdf (14 January 2025)\nMitteilungsblatt vom 22.01.2025, StJ 2024/25, 15. Stk. RN96 Page 6 of 15" }, { "bulletin": { "id": 12875, "academic_year": "2024/25", "issue": "15", "published": "2025-01-22T00:00:00+01:00", "teaser": "Richtlinie des Rektorates: „Standards für gute wissenschaftliche Praxis“ – Änderung; Geschäftsordnung Stabsstelle Interne Revision; Satzung: Satzungsteil A. Studienrechtliche Bestimmungen – Änderung; Satzung: Satzungsteil I. Wahlordnung – Änderung; Ausschreibung von Stellen", "url": "https://online.medunigraz.at/mug_online/wbMitteilungsblaetter_neu.display?pNr=12875&pDocNr=1590955&pOrgNr=1" }, "index": 24, "text": "25\nResponsibilities associated with authorship:\n 1. Compliance with all principles of good scientific practice and, in particular, the Copyright\n Act and Data Protection Act;\n 2. Responsibility for one's own contribution to the study;\n 3. Trust in the scientific integrity of the authors while maintaining critical vigilance (approval\n of publication and authorship only if no reasonable doubts about scientific integrity exist),\n 4. Responsibility to select publication bodies that follow the principles of good scientific\n practice (exclusion of predatory journals that disregard the principles of good scientific\n practice).\nResponsibilities in the selection of publication media\nAuthors are obliged to select publication media that are committed to the principles of good\nscientific practice. This applies in particular to the exclusion of predatory journals and predatory\n(fake) conferences 6, which operate without adequate scientific quality control and thus disregard\nthe principles of good scientific practice. Some mega-journals that publish an unusually high\nnumber of special issues 7 are also suspected of neglecting scientific quality control. Presentation\nat predatory (fake) conferences and publication in predatory journals and mega-journals that are\nnot listed in the Web of Science therefore represent a violation of good scientific practice.\nAuthors should therefore consult the Web of Science Master Journal List 8 and, in the case of open\naccess publications, the Directory of Open Access Journals 9 and Think.Check.Submit. 10. To avoid\npredatory (fake) conferences, Think.Check.Attend. 11 and the UNESCO Open Science Toolkit\n\"Identifying predatory academic journals and conferences\" 12 provide assistance.\nResponsibilities when using artificial intelligence\nThe use of artificial intelligence (AI) tools (AI methods and generative AI models/chatbots) in the\nwriting of scientific manuscripts (theses, publications, research project proposals) affects the\nprinciples of good scientific practice and thus the responsibility of the authors. The respective\nregulations of scientific publishers and journals must be followed. The guidelines of the Medical\nUniversity of Graz are based on international standards, in particular the WAME Recommendations\non Chatbots and Generative Artificial Intelligence in Relation to Scholarly Publications, which also\nexplain the terms generative AI and chatbots 13:\n In general, only AI tools whose use does not violate any applicable legal requirements (in\n particular laws, regulations) may be used.\n Any use of AI tools in the preparation of scientific manuscripts (theses, publications, research\n project proposals) must be disclosed. For this purpose, the name and version of the AI tool used\n6\n https://www.interacademies.org/publication/predatory-practices-report-English;\nhttps://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000383324 (14 January 2025)\n7\n https://predatoryreports.org/news/f/the-miracle-of-special-issues-multiplication (14 January\n2025)\n8\n https://mjl.clarivate.com/home (14 January 2025)\n9\n https://doaj.org (14 January 2025)\n10\n https://thinkchecksubmit.org/ (14 January 2025)\n11\n https://thinkcheckattend.org/ (14 January 2025)\n12\n https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000383324 (14 January 2025)\n13\n https://wame.org/page3.php?id=106 (14 January 2025)\nMitteilungsblatt vom 22.01.2025, StJ 2024/25, 15. Stk. RN96 Page 7 of 15" }, { "bulletin": { "id": 12875, "academic_year": "2024/25", "issue": "15", "published": "2025-01-22T00:00:00+01:00", "teaser": "Richtlinie des Rektorates: „Standards für gute wissenschaftliche Praxis“ – Änderung; Geschäftsordnung Stabsstelle Interne Revision; Satzung: Satzungsteil A. Studienrechtliche Bestimmungen – Änderung; Satzung: Satzungsteil I. Wahlordnung – Änderung; Ausschreibung von Stellen", "url": "https://online.medunigraz.at/mug_online/wbMitteilungsblaetter_neu.display?pNr=12875&pDocNr=1590955&pOrgNr=1" }, "index": 25, "text": "26\n as well as the purpose and scope of the AI use should be stated in the appropriate place in the\n manuscript. When using generative AI models, the prompt of the input should also be mentioned.\n As any input into generative AI models is also used for their training, care must be taken to ensure\n that the input of text and data does not violate third-party intellectual property or data protection\n regulations. This also applies to the input of data or findings that could serve as the basis for a\n later patent application and therefore may not be made public (conduct prejudicial to novelty)\n or are considered confidential for other reasons.\n Generative AI models cannot be listed as authors, as it is not AI tools but only their users who are\n responsible for the copyright of the generated texts. The users/authors must ensure that the AI-\n generated texts do not violate copyrights or other rights of third parties, in particular with regard\n to previously published works.\n Texts created with the help of generative AI models must be carefully checked and edited, as AI\n can generate false and misleading texts.\n Generative AI models can be used to improve the language and readability of texts. The\n interpretation of the results and scientific conclusions are the responsibility of the authors.\n4.3 Avoiding authorship conflicts in collaborative publications\nWhen a larger (especially multicentre) group publishes the results of a study, that group should\nnominate individuals who will take direct responsibility for the manuscript. These individuals should\nmeet all the criteria for authorship defined above. If a group submits a manuscript collaboratively,\nthe corresponding author should clearly indicate how the publication should be cited and should\nlist all individual authors and the name of the group, if applicable.\nIn order to give due consideration to all those who have contributed to a publication and to avoid\nconflicts regarding authorship, we recommend that the names of the authors and their order – or\nat least the criteria that determine the inclusion and order of authors – be discussed in good time,\ni.e. before or during the creation of the manuscript rather than shortly before submission of the\nmanuscript. However, it should be noted that the relative contributions of individual authors to the\noverall study may change over the course of a study. Taking such circumstances into account, the\ninclusion and order of authors must be determined in a joint decision before submitting a\npublication, whereby all authors are obliged to participate in the decision and the consent of all\nauthors is required for a decision. The corresponding author or group leader has a special\nresponsibility to coordinate the decision-making process in an open, fair and transparent manner.\nFurthermore, we recommend preparing a detailed description of all authors’ contributions\n(contributorship disclosure).\n4.4 Special recommendations for publications from clinical departments\nWhen preparing a manuscript based on work performed in clinical departments, the authors must\ntake into account the fact that the publications are often based on treatment results that were\n(also) produced by persons other than the authors. Before publishing such contributions, therefore,\nthe following recommendations should be considered:\n Authors are required to ensure the transparency of their actions and to inform persons\n involved in the patient treatment in question well ahead time when a publication is\n planned. Therefore, the eligibility for authorship should be discussed and determined\n among the persons involved, taking into account the criteria described above. The\nMitteilungsblatt vom 22.01.2025, StJ 2024/25, 15. Stk. RN96 Page 8 of 15" }, { "bulletin": { "id": 12875, "academic_year": "2024/25", "issue": "15", "published": "2025-01-22T00:00:00+01:00", "teaser": "Richtlinie des Rektorates: „Standards für gute wissenschaftliche Praxis“ – Änderung; Geschäftsordnung Stabsstelle Interne Revision; Satzung: Satzungsteil A. Studienrechtliche Bestimmungen – Änderung; Satzung: Satzungsteil I. Wahlordnung – Änderung; Ausschreibung von Stellen", "url": "https://online.medunigraz.at/mug_online/wbMitteilungsblaetter_neu.display?pNr=12875&pDocNr=1590955&pOrgNr=1" }, "index": 26, "text": "27\n respective heads of the organisational units should create the collegial environment for\n such discussions and, if necessary, supervise these discussions.\n If a doctor carried out routine treatment and undertook substantial additional activities\n relevant to the research that went beyond the steps required to perform the medical\n treatment (e.g. photographing a feature or carrying out an operation that revealed\n something relevant to the research), then the planned publication and its contribution\n should be discussed with this person.\n Likewise, experts who frequently carry out specialised activities and contribute their\n expertise to a publication in the sense of the authorship criteria listed above should be\n considered as authors, listed in the acknowledgements, or recognised in the form of a\n citation in the publication, where appropriate.\n5. (Peer) reviewing, evaluation, assessment and similar activities\nResearchers who act as peer reviewers for journals, funding agencies, or other institutions are\nrequired to disclose relationships that could be considered sources of a potential conflict of\ninterest.\nResearchers who participate in peer review processes as reviewers must not use ideas and\nknowledge from the material they are reviewing for their own benefit or pass these on to others.\nThey must respect the authors’ rights by not discussing the work in question in public or\nappropriating their ideas before the manuscript in question has been published. In addition, they\nshould prepare the review in a timely manner and without deliberate delay. Even when researchers\nprovide negative assessments on the content of publications, project proposals, or other documents\nthat they have reviewed, the criticism must be formulated in a factual and respectful manner.\nSince documents provided for review constitute third-party intellectual property and are therefore\nconfidential, their input into generative AI models is not permitted.\nBefore accepting positions as reviewers or other functions in the scientific community, researchers\nshould assess the quality and professionality of the commissioning institution, so that their work\ndoes not support so-called predatory journals, predatory (fake) conferences or only ostensibly\nscientific publications/events.\n6. Supervision of young scientists\nThe introduction of students, doctoral students and young scientists to good scientific practice\nincludes:\n Acting as a role model to achieve the purposes described in this guideline when carrying out their\n own academic work,\n Familiarising students and young scientists with the standards for good scientific practice,\n Providing a research environment that enables students and researchers early on in their careers\n to meet the standards, and\n Encouraging students and young researchers to openly engage in critical discussions and\n evaluations of their work.\nIn particular, the following points must be addressed when supervising and publishing academic\nmanuscripts as pursuant to §§ 80-86 of the Universities Act 2002 (UG) as amended:\nMitteilungsblatt vom 22.01.2025, StJ 2024/25, 15. Stk. RN96 Page 9 of 15" }, { "bulletin": { "id": 12875, "academic_year": "2024/25", "issue": "15", "published": "2025-01-22T00:00:00+01:00", "teaser": "Richtlinie des Rektorates: „Standards für gute wissenschaftliche Praxis“ – Änderung; Geschäftsordnung Stabsstelle Interne Revision; Satzung: Satzungsteil A. Studienrechtliche Bestimmungen – Änderung; Satzung: Satzungsteil I. Wahlordnung – Änderung; Ausschreibung von Stellen", "url": "https://online.medunigraz.at/mug_online/wbMitteilungsblaetter_neu.display?pNr=12875&pDocNr=1590955&pOrgNr=1" }, "index": 27, "text": "28\n If the work has already been published by a publisher/journal prior to its publication in another\n form according to § 86 UG idgF, it must be ensured that permission for a second publication in\n the form of a diploma/master’s thesis or dissertation has been granted in the contract that was\n signed between the authors and the publisher. Under all circumstances, such publications must\n be cited correctly in the diploma/master's thesis or dissertation.\n Students should be made aware during their supervisory period that granting publishers/journals\n exclusive data usage rights may have far-reaching consequences and may conflict with their\n obligation to publish these data in theses according to the UG. If the publications appear in an\n open access journal, the data usage rights remain with the authors, depending on the respective\n Creative Commons licence applied (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/). This means that it\n is possible for the author to reuse data in another publication (e.g. in a thesis) if the source\n (author) is cited.\n Results obtained in the context of diploma/master's theses or dissertations may also be published\n in a journal after approval of the thesis, provided that the thesis is cited in full (author, title,\n name of the approving institution, year of approval). If it is already known at the time of\n submission of the thesis in which journal the results of the thesis will be published in the near\n future, this must also be stated in the disclosures of the thesis (authors, title, journal). It must\n be clarified in advance that the selected journal permits the secondary publication of a thesis or\n the results described therein 14.\n When choosing a journal for the publication of scientific works according to the UG, attention\n must be paid to any existing publishing embargoes set by the chosen journal that may conflict\n with the obligation to publish the information elsewhere within a certain time period according\n to the UG. In this case, as well as in the case of patent applications, it is possible to apply for a\n temporary exclusion from library use (a so-called “blocking request”) pursuant to § 86 para. 4\n UG as amended.\n During the supervisory period, the supervisors need to check whether academic misconduct\n as defined in § 2a para. 3 HS-QSG has occurred or whether there are indications of such\n misconduct. The use of ghostwriting services is also punishable by law (§ 116a UG). Under\n all circumstances, students must be instructed as to the correct procedure and citation\n method(s).\n14\n Additional information is available at https://libraries.mit.edu/scholarly/copyright/theses-\ncopyright/theses-and-article-publishing/ (14 January 2025).\nMitteilungsblatt vom 22.01.2025, StJ 2024/25, 15. Stk. RN96 Page 10 of 15" }, { "bulletin": { "id": 12875, "academic_year": "2024/25", "issue": "15", "published": "2025-01-22T00:00:00+01:00", "teaser": "Richtlinie des Rektorates: „Standards für gute wissenschaftliche Praxis“ – Änderung; Geschäftsordnung Stabsstelle Interne Revision; Satzung: Satzungsteil A. Studienrechtliche Bestimmungen – Änderung; Satzung: Satzungsteil I. Wahlordnung – Änderung; Ausschreibung von Stellen", "url": "https://online.medunigraz.at/mug_online/wbMitteilungsblaetter_neu.display?pNr=12875&pDocNr=1590955&pOrgNr=1" }, "index": 28, "text": "29\n7. Research on patients and test persons (clinical research)\n In the context of medical research, the Medical University of Graz is committed to adhering to\n the principles outlined in the Declaration of Helsinki 15 and the guidelines of Good Clinical\n Practice 16.\n All research projects involving human subjects must be submitted to the Ethics Committee for\n review and approval in accordance with § 30 UG idgF. This includes projects in which any kinds\n of measures are performed on patients and/or test persons, on potentially identifiable human\n material (e.g. blood, serum, tissue samples, DNA), or on data (e.g. medical records), and\n specifically referring to measures which are carried out to purely gain knowledge and/or which\n do not exclusively provide health benefits for the patients and/or test persons on whom the\n measures are carried out.\n It is irrelevant whether the project involves the testing of a medicinal product, a medical device,\n a new method, or falls into any other research project category.\n The following research projects must be submitted to the Ethics Committee:\n - Clinical trials on medicinal products\n - Clinical trials on medical devices\n - Applications of new medical methods\n - Non-interventional studies\n - Applied medical research on humans\n - Research on potentially identifiable human material or that involves personal data (this\n also applies to retrospective studies, and only fully anonymised data are excluded),\n - genetic analyses for scientific purposes\n - Research involving foodstuffs, food supplements, or cosmetic products in accordance with\n the Food Safety and Consumer Protection Act §5 Para. 6\n Therapeutic trials always concern only the individual patient and do not require the approval of\n the Ethics Committee or authorities. However, if a scientific evaluation is planned, the study is\n no longer considered as a “therapeutic trial”, but a clinical study, and an evaluation by an ethical\n committee or other regulatory authority must be performed. The trial must be submitted for\n evaluation before the project begins and must comply with the requirements of the Ethics\n Committee. The updated version of these requirements is available on the website of the Ethics\n Committee (https://www.medunigraz.at/en/ethics-committee/). Research projects may only\n be started after the Ethics Committee has given its written approval.\n It is not necessary to submit your project for approval to the Ethics Committee if the planned\n measures only address aspects of patient care that are in the interest of the patients and are not\n carried out to specifically pursue research interests. This also applies to the use of medicines for\n an unapproved indication (off-label use).\n15\n English version: https://www.wma.net/policies-post/wma-declaration-of-helsinki-ethical-\nprinciples-for-medical-research-involving-human-subjects/ (14 January 2025)\nGerman version: https://www.bundesaerztekammer.de/fileadmin/user_upload/downloads/pdf-\nOrdner/International/Deklaration_von_Helsinki_2013_20190905.pdf (14 January 2025)\n16\n ICH-GCP Good Clinical Practice Guideline:\nhttps://database.ich.org/sites/default/files/E6_R2_Addendum.pdf (14 January 2025)\nISO 14155 - Clinical investigation of medical devices for human subjects - Good clinical practice:\nhttps://www.iso.org/standard/71690.html (14 January 2025)\nMitteilungsblatt vom 22.01.2025, StJ 2024/25, 15. Stk. RN96 Page 11 of 15" }, { "bulletin": { "id": 12875, "academic_year": "2024/25", "issue": "15", "published": "2025-01-22T00:00:00+01:00", "teaser": "Richtlinie des Rektorates: „Standards für gute wissenschaftliche Praxis“ – Änderung; Geschäftsordnung Stabsstelle Interne Revision; Satzung: Satzungsteil A. Studienrechtliche Bestimmungen – Änderung; Satzung: Satzungsteil I. Wahlordnung – Änderung; Ausschreibung von Stellen", "url": "https://online.medunigraz.at/mug_online/wbMitteilungsblaetter_neu.display?pNr=12875&pDocNr=1590955&pOrgNr=1" }, "index": 29, "text": "30\n The project must be in compliance with the provisions of the Data Protection Act. The legal basis\n for data protection can be found on the website of the Medical University of Graz:\n https://www.medunigraz.at/en/data-protection.\n Confidentiality must be guaranteed when handling patient and volunteer data. Personal data\n must be pseudonymised or anonymised immediately, as soon as the personal reference is no\n longer necessary for research purposes. If the data are pseudonymised, the “key” must be stored\n separately from the personal data so that adequate protection is provided from access by third\n parties. It is recommended that the pseudonymisation/anonymisation procedure(s) be carried\n out by the Institute for Medical Informatics, Statistics and Documentation at the Medical\n University of Graz.\n In addition to meeting the above-mentioned requirements prior to submitting the project to the\n Ethics Committee, the authors must observe the requirements stated by publishers (for\n publications) or funding bodies (for funding applications) regarding ethical evaluations.\n8. Animal testing\n All animal experiments are subject to the Austrian Animal Experiments Act 2012 (TVG) and, if\n they are carried out in the area of the Medical University of Graz, must be applied for approval\n to the Federal Animal Experiments Commission at the Federal Ministry responsible for science\n and research. The Department of Biomedical Research at the Medical University of Graz receives\n applications for approval and submits them to the Rectorate. Applications for animal experiments\n can only be submitted via the Rectorate.\n In the application, the researcher must describe and explain why the animal experiment in\n question is necessary and appropriate to achieve the expected gain in knowledge.\n Animal experiments must not be carried out if the intended experimental objectives can be\n achieved by other recognised methods and procedures (alternative methods).\n Every effort must be made to reduce the number of animal experiments, the number of animals\n used in animal experiments and the stress on the animals to the lowest possible level necessary\n for the desired gain in knowledge.\n Clear criteria must be established in advance for when an experiment on an individual animal is\n terminated.\n Animal experiments can only be carried out after all the necessary permits have been obtained.\n9. Genetic research and genetic engineering\n All research projects in which genetically modified organisms are worked with or used (including\n production, propagation, storage, inactivation, or disposal) are subject to the Austrian Gene\n Technology Act (GTG, Gentechnikgesetz). The project must be submitted to the Federal Ministry\n of Education, Science and Research or this organisation must be notified about the project, as it\n is responsible for assessing the safety level of the research, in accordance with Section II of the\n GTG entitled “Work with genetically modified organisms in contained systems”. Depending on\n the assessed safety level, the Federal Ministry of Education, Science and Research must be\n notified about the project or the project must be submitted for approval before work begins.\n Each project must be submitted internally to the responsible biosafety committee at the\n University so that the committee can carry out the necessary safety classification.\n Gene therapies on humans are subject to the Austrian GTG and, in particular, Section IV entitled\n “Gene analysis and gene therapy on humans”. These therapies must be carried out in accordance\n with the provisions described therein and submitted to the Federal Ministry of Health for\n approval. Depending on the project, it must be submitted internally to the responsible biosafety\nMitteilungsblatt vom 22.01.2025, StJ 2024/25, 15. Stk. RN96 Page 12 of 15" }, { "bulletin": { "id": 12875, "academic_year": "2024/25", "issue": "15", "published": "2025-01-22T00:00:00+01:00", "teaser": "Richtlinie des Rektorates: „Standards für gute wissenschaftliche Praxis“ – Änderung; Geschäftsordnung Stabsstelle Interne Revision; Satzung: Satzungsteil A. Studienrechtliche Bestimmungen – Änderung; Satzung: Satzungsteil I. Wahlordnung – Änderung; Ausschreibung von Stellen", "url": "https://online.medunigraz.at/mug_online/wbMitteilungsblaetter_neu.display?pNr=12875&pDocNr=1590955&pOrgNr=1" }, "index": 30, "text": "31\n committee at the University so that the committee can carry out the necessary safety\n classification.\n Gene analyses on humans are also subject to the Austrian GTG and, in particular, Section IV\n entitled “Gene analysis and gene therapy on humans”. These must be reported to the Federal\n Ministry of Health in accordance with the provisions described in Section IV.\n Genetic analyses performed for scientific and educational purposes may only be carried out if\n the donor of the corresponding sample has expressly consented to this use in writing or if the\n sample has been de-identified 17. Non-genetic medical data that will be linked to genetic data of\n the same person must also be de-identified. The allocation of these data to the respective sample\n donor may only take place if the valid consent of the person concerned has been obtained with\n the approval of the Ethics Committee.\n Results of genetic analyses may only be combined or published if suitable measures are taken to\n ensure that the sample donor cannot be identified (cf. Section IV, § 66 GTG), considering aspects\n described in para. 1, § 66 GTG, Section IV.\n With regard to the collection of and research on human tissue samples, researchers are advised\n to read the document entitled “Human Biobanks for Research” (published by the German\n National Ethics Council, 2010) and consider the information therein.\n10. Scientific misconduct and scientific fraud\nScientific misconduct occurs when standards of good scientific practice are violated intentionally,\nknowingly or through gross negligence. Intentional misconduct occurs when a researcher considers a\nviolation of standards of good scientific practice to be possible and accepts this. Anyone who considers\na violation of standards of good scientific practice to be not only possible, but certain, is acting\nknowingly. Gross negligence is committed by anyone who conspicuously disregards the care required by\nthe specific research context and therefore fails to recognize that he or she is violating the standards\nof good scientific practice to a high degree; this is the case, for example, if even the simplest, very\nobvious considerations are not made and what should have been obvious to everyone in the given case\nis ignored (§ 3 para 1 of the Guidelines of the Austrian Agency for Research Integrity on Good Scientific\nPractice).\nAccording to § 2a para. 3 HS-QSG, scientific misconduct is to be qualified in any case if someone\n 1. obstructs or sabotages the research activities of other persons (including damaging, destroying\n or manipulating experimental set-ups, equipment, documents, software, consumables, etc.),\n 2. uses unauthorized aids, including the improper use of artificial intelligence applications,\n 3. makes unauthorized use of another person when writing a paper or taking an examination or\n makes use of work commissioned from a third party (ghostwriting);\n 4. adopts texts, ideas or artistic works in whole or in part and passes them off as their own, in\n particular if someone uses text passages, theories, hypotheses, findings or data by adopting them\n directly, paraphrasing or translating them without identifying and citing the source and the\n author accordingly (plagiarism) or\n 5. invents or falsifies data or results (including the tacit selection and elimination of undesired\n results, manipulation of graphical representations, false information in funding applications or\n in the context of scientific job applications).\n17\n The GTG explicitly refers to \"de-identification\" instead of using the terms “anonymisation” and\n “pseudonymisation”, which are used in the GDPR and the Data Protection Act.\nMitteilungsblatt vom 22.01.2025, StJ 2024/25, 15. Stk. RN96 Page 13 of 15" }, { "bulletin": { "id": 12875, "academic_year": "2024/25", "issue": "15", "published": "2025-01-22T00:00:00+01:00", "teaser": "Richtlinie des Rektorates: „Standards für gute wissenschaftliche Praxis“ – Änderung; Geschäftsordnung Stabsstelle Interne Revision; Satzung: Satzungsteil A. Studienrechtliche Bestimmungen – Änderung; Satzung: Satzungsteil I. Wahlordnung – Änderung; Ausschreibung von Stellen", "url": "https://online.medunigraz.at/mug_online/wbMitteilungsblaetter_neu.display?pNr=12875&pDocNr=1590955&pOrgNr=1" }, "index": 31, "text": "32\n In addition, the following actions, if committed intentionally or through gross negligence, are\n considered violations of good scientific practice and constitute acts of scientific misconduct:\n Losing primary data as a result of negligence, elimination of primary data, removing primary data\n from the laboratory or institution without coming to an agreement with the laboratories or\n institutions involved, or resulting in a violation of applicable legal provisions, discipline-specific\n standards, or these good scientific practice standards;\n Failure to obtain the necessary approvals (e.g. ethics vote, animal testing approval);\n Publication in predatory journals and mega-journals that are not listed in the Web of Science,\n and presentation at predatory (fake) conferences;\n Publication of fake papers and participation in research paper mills 18;\n Non-disclosure of the use of AI methods and generative AI models in the writing of scientific\n manuscripts (theses, publications, research project proposals);\n Input of texts and data that are protected by copyright, subject to data protection or considered\n confidential into generative AI models;\n Inclusion of persons who do not fulfil the authorship criteria in the list of authors;\n Assuming authorship for unjustifiable reasons;\n Excluding another person from a justified authorship or indicating another person as an author\n without that person's consent;\n Publishing an original work twice (or more often), i.e. repeatedly publishing the contents of an\n original work in another original work under the same or a modified title, or with the same or a\n modified list of authors, unless this is covered by the agreement to grant rights of use as\n described in Section 37a of the Copyright Act (UrhG, Urheberrechtsgesetz);\n Referring to experienced and/or senior scientists: Neglecting the duty to teach students and less\n experienced staff (research assistants) the principles of good scientific practice;\n Defaming the principles of good scientific practice; and\n Committing a breach of trust in a function as an expert, consultant, evaluator, reviewer, or\n similar function.\nThe following acts, if performed either intentionally or negligently, are considered as contributing\nto the violation of good scientific practice and result in joint responsibility being taken for scientific\nmisconduct or fraud:\n Active and conscious participation in the misconduct or fraud of others\n Gross neglect of one's own duties as a supervisor or as a leader of a research group\n11. Ombuds Committee for Good Scientific Practice\nIn order to ensure good scientific practice, the Medical University of Graz has established an\nOmbuds Committee for Good Scientific Practice. The tasks and working methods of this Committee\nare regulated in separate rules of procedure.\nSources\n18\n https://publicationethics.org/guidance/research-and-reports/paper-mills-research (14 January\n2025)\nMitteilungsblatt vom 22.01.2025, StJ 2024/25, 15. Stk. RN96 Page 14 of 15" }, { "bulletin": { "id": 12875, "academic_year": "2024/25", "issue": "15", "published": "2025-01-22T00:00:00+01:00", "teaser": "Richtlinie des Rektorates: „Standards für gute wissenschaftliche Praxis“ – Änderung; Geschäftsordnung Stabsstelle Interne Revision; Satzung: Satzungsteil A. Studienrechtliche Bestimmungen – Änderung; Satzung: Satzungsteil I. Wahlordnung – Änderung; Ausschreibung von Stellen", "url": "https://online.medunigraz.at/mug_online/wbMitteilungsblaetter_neu.display?pNr=12875&pDocNr=1590955&pOrgNr=1" }, "index": 32, "text": "33\nWhile preparing this text, the Medical University of Graz has taken passages from the following\ndocuments or referred to their content:\n “Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Dignity of the Human Being with Regard to\n the Application of Biology and Medicine” (Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine),\n European Treaty Series (ETS) No. 164, https://rm.coe.int/168007cf98 (14 January 2025)\n “Danish Code of Conduct for Research Integrity”, https://ufm.dk/en/publications/2014/files-\n 2014-1/the-danish-code-of-conduct-for-research-integrity.pdf (14 January 2025)\n European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity. Revised version. ALLEA, All European\n Academies, https://allea.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/European-Code-of-Conduct-\n Revised-Edition-2023.pdf (14 January 2025)\n “Good Scientific Practice. Ethics in Science and Research”. Guidelines of the Medical University\n of Vienna,\n https://www.meduniwien.ac.at/web/fileadmin/content/forschung/pdf/MedUni_Wien_GSP-\n Richtlinien_2017.pdf (14 January 2025)\n “Good Scientific Practice in Research and Scholarship”, European Science Foundation Policy\n Briefing, December 2000,\n http://archives.esf.org/fileadmin/Public_documents/Publications/ESPB10.pdf (14 January\n 2025)\n “Humanbiobanken für die Forschung [Human Biobanks for Research]”, Statement of the\n German National Ethics Council 2010,\n https://www.ethikrat.org/presse/pressekonferenzen/veroeffentlichung-der-stellungnahme-\n humanbiobanken-fuer-die-forschung/ (14 January 2025)\n Recommended Guidelines for Authorship on Manuscripts, The Association of Biomolecular\n Resource Facilities (ABRF), https://abrf.org/authorship-guidelines (14 January 2025)\n “Austrian Agency for Research Integrity Guidelines for Good Scientific Practice”,\n https://oeawi.at/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/OeAWI_Brosch%C3%BCre_Web_2019.pdf (14\n January 2025)\n “Singapore Statement on Research Integrity”, https://www.wcrif.org/downloads/main-\n website/singapore-statements/223-singpore-statement-a4size/file (14 January 2025)\n “The European Charter of Researchers”, https://euraxess.ec.europa.eu/jobs/charter/european-\n charter (14 January 2025)\n “The European Network of Research Integrity Offices (ENRIO)”, http://www.enrio.eu/about-\n enrio/ (14 January 2025)\n “The FAIR Data Principles”, FORCE11, https://www.force11.org/group/fairgroup/fairprinciples\n (14 January 2025)\n “FWF-Verfahren bei Verdachtsfällen wissenschaftlichen Fehlverhaltens [FWF procedures in\n cases of suspected scientific misconduct]”, FWF, https://www.fwf.ac.at/foerdern/schritte-zur-\n erfolgreichen-foerderung/weitere-informationen/integritaet-und-ethik (14 January 2025)\n “Verfahrensleitfaden zur guten wissenschaftlichen Praxis [Procedural Guide to Good Scientific\n Practice]”. German Research Foundation,\n https://www.dfg.de/resource/blob/172176/41689f880027cbef9e2d8c1ad4dc006a/verfahrensleitfad\n en-gwp-data.pdf (14 January 2025)\nMitteilungsblatt vom 22.01.2025, StJ 2024/25, 15. Stk. RN96 Page 15 of 15" }, { "bulletin": { "id": 12875, "academic_year": "2024/25", "issue": "15", "published": "2025-01-22T00:00:00+01:00", "teaser": "Richtlinie des Rektorates: „Standards für gute wissenschaftliche Praxis“ – Änderung; Geschäftsordnung Stabsstelle Interne Revision; Satzung: Satzungsteil A. Studienrechtliche Bestimmungen – Änderung; Satzung: Satzungsteil I. Wahlordnung – Änderung; Ausschreibung von Stellen", "url": "https://online.medunigraz.at/mug_online/wbMitteilungsblaetter_neu.display?pNr=12875&pDocNr=1590955&pOrgNr=1" }, "index": 33, "text": "34\n97. Geschäftsordnung Stabsstelle Interne Revision\nDie Rektorin, Frau Assoz. Prof.in Dr.in Andrea KURZ, gibt bekannt, dass das Rektorat der Medizinischen\nUniversität Graz in seiner Sitzung am 7.1.2024 die Geschäftsordnung Stabsstelle Interne Revision wie\nfolgt beschlossen hat:\n MTBl. vom 22.01.2025, StJ 2024/25, 15. Stk\nFür die inhaltliche Richtigkeit sowie die sprachliche und grafische Ausgestaltung zeichnet das/der verfassende Gremium/Organ/Funktionsträger des\nim MTBl. zu veröffentlichenden Textes verantwortlich." }, { "bulletin": { "id": 12875, "academic_year": "2024/25", "issue": "15", "published": "2025-01-22T00:00:00+01:00", "teaser": "Richtlinie des Rektorates: „Standards für gute wissenschaftliche Praxis“ – Änderung; Geschäftsordnung Stabsstelle Interne Revision; Satzung: Satzungsteil A. Studienrechtliche Bestimmungen – Änderung; Satzung: Satzungsteil I. Wahlordnung – Änderung; Ausschreibung von Stellen", "url": "https://online.medunigraz.at/mug_online/wbMitteilungsblaetter_neu.display?pNr=12875&pDocNr=1590955&pOrgNr=1" }, "index": 34, "text": "35\n Geschäftsordnung Stabsstelle Interne Revision\n§ 1 Präambel\n (1) Diese Geschäftsordnung der Stabsstelle Interne Revision (im Folgenden S-IR) dient der\n Festlegung der Aufgabenstellung, Befugnisse, Pflichten und Verantwortung der S-IR. Sie\n beschreibt die Stellung bzw. die Eingliederung der S-IR in die Organisation der\n Medizinischen Universität Graz und regelt den Umfang der Revisionstätigkeit, den Zugriff\n auf Aufzeichnungen, Personal und Vermögenswerte sowie das Berichtswesen.\n (2) Die S-IR stärkt die Fähigkeit der Organisation, Werte zu schaffen, zu schützen und zu\n erhalten, indem sie der Universitätsleitung unabhängige, risikobasierte und objektive\n Prüfungssicherheit, Beratung, Erkenntnisse und Voraussicht liefert. Sie liefert dazu einen\n Beitrag zur Verbesserung der Organisation in der erfolgreichen Realisierung ihrer Ziele, den\n Governance-, risikomanagement- und Kontrollprozessen, der Entscheidungsfindung und\n Aufsicht, der Reputation und Glaubwürdigkeit bei ihren Stakeholdern sowie bei der\n Fähigkeit, dem öffentlichen Interesse zu dienen.\n (3) Die S-IR bekennt sich zu den „Global Internal Audit Standards“ des „Institute of Internal\n Auditors“. Die Mitarbeiter/innen der S-IR handeln im Rahmen ihrer Tätigkeit unter Wahrung\n der berufsethischen Grundsätze basierend auf der Domain II: Ethik und Professionalität der\n Global Internal Audit Standards.\n§ 2 Stellung der S-IR und Rechte und Pflichten der Mitarbeiter*innen der S-IR\n (1) Die S-IR ist dem Rektorat unterstellt, verantwortlich, informations- und berichtspflichtig.\n Organisationsrechtlich ist die S-IR als Stabstelle der*dem Rektor*in zugeordnet. Funktionell\n und organisatorisch ist die S-IR von den zu prüfenden Organisations- bzw. Subeinheiten\n unabhängig.\n (2) Die Bestellung der*des Leiter*in der S-IR ist dem Universitätsrat zur Kenntnis zu übermitteln\n und ist von diesem zu genehmigen. Die Bestellung gilt als genehmigt, sofern innerhalb einer\n Woche kein Widerspruch erfolgt oder um Fristverlängerung ersucht wird.\n (3) Prüfungs- und Beratungsgegenstand der S-IR sind die gesamte Medizinische Universität Graz\n (unter anderem sämtliche Organisations- und Subeinheiten, Einrichtungen, Projekte,\n interne Geschäftsprozesse) sowie jene Beteiligungen, bei denen die Medizinische\n Universität Graz eine Prüfung durch die S-IR erwirken kann.\n (4) Die S-IR ist mit angemessenen Ressourcen (Personal und Sachmittel) für die\n Revisionstätigkeit auszustatten. Nach Genehmigung durch die*den Rektor*in können\n Revisionstätigkeiten gemeinsam mit Mitarbeiter*innen anderer Fachabteilungen und*oder\n externen Berater*innen durchgeführt werden.\n (5) Die Mitarbeiter*innen der S-IR dürfen nicht an Revisionstätigkeiten teilnehmen, bei denen\n ihre Unabhängigkeit oder Objektivität beeinträchtigt ist (Unvereinbarkeiten und\n Interessenskonflikte). Letzteres trifft insbesondere zu, wenn ein*e Mitarbeiter*in der S-IR\n eine Aktivität prüft, für die sie/er im Verlauf des vorangegangenen Jahres verantwortlich\n war oder der geprüften Einheit nahe Verwandte oder sonstige nahestehende Personen\n angehören. Jeder potentielle Anschein einer Beeinträchtigung der Objektivität ist zu\n Pioneering Minds - Research and Education for Patients‘ Health and Well-Being\n Medizinische Universität Graz, Neue Stiftingtalstraße 6, 8010 Graz, www.medunigraz.at\n Rechtsform: Juristische Person öffentlichen Rechts gem. UG 2002. Information: Mitteilungsblatt der Universität, DVR-Nr. 210 9494.\n UID: ATU57511179. Bankverbindung: UniCredit Bank Austria AG IBAN: AT931200050094840004, BIC: BKAUATWW\n Raiffeisen Landesbank Steiermark IBAN: AT443800000000049510, BIC: RZSTAT2G\n Mitteilungsblatt vom 22.01.2025, StJ 2024/25, 15. Stk. RN97" }, { "bulletin": { "id": 12875, "academic_year": "2024/25", "issue": "15", "published": "2025-01-22T00:00:00+01:00", "teaser": "Richtlinie des Rektorates: „Standards für gute wissenschaftliche Praxis“ – Änderung; Geschäftsordnung Stabsstelle Interne Revision; Satzung: Satzungsteil A. Studienrechtliche Bestimmungen – Änderung; Satzung: Satzungsteil I. Wahlordnung – Änderung; Ausschreibung von Stellen", "url": "https://online.medunigraz.at/mug_online/wbMitteilungsblaetter_neu.display?pNr=12875&pDocNr=1590955&pOrgNr=1" }, "index": 35, "text": "36\n Beginn der Prüfung gegenüber der*dem Geprüften sowie im abschließenden\n Revisionsbericht offenzulegen.\n (6) Die Mitarbeiter*innen der S-IR sind gegenüber der zu prüfenden Einheit weisungsfrei, haben\n aber auch kein Weisungsrecht. Alle Entscheidungen aufgrund der von ihnen getroffenen\n Feststellungen bleiben den für Weisungen zuständigen Organen und/oder\n Dienstvorgesetzten vorbehalten, die nach den geltenden Vorschriften, insbesondere nach\n den Bestimmungen des Universitätsgesetzes, des Organisationsplans und/oder der\n Geschäftsordnung des Rektorats dafür zuständig sind.\n (7) Die Mitarbeiter*innen der S-IR, hinzugezogene Mitarbeiter*innen anderer Fachabteilungen\n und beigezogene externe Berater*innen sind bei der Wahrnehmung ihrer Aufgaben zur\n Verschwiegenheit, auch innerhalb der Medizinischen Universität Graz, über alle ihnen im\n Rahmen ihrer Tätigkeit bekannt gewordenen Sachverhalte verpflichtet. Diese\n Verpflichtung zur Verschwiegenheit erstreckt sich über das Ende des Dienstverhältnisses\n der Mitarbeiter*innen bzw. Ende des Auftragsverhältnisses externer Berater*innen hinaus.\n Einsicht in Dokumente und Arbeitsunterlagen der S-IR ist bei Bedarf nur gesetzlich befugten\n Personen zu gewähren. Eine darüberhinausgehende Einsichtnahme bedarf der Zustimmung\n der Rektorin*des Rektors.\n (8) Die S-IR hat sowohl ein aktives Informationsrecht (umfassendes und uneingeschränktes\n Recht auf unmittelbaren Zugriff zu Informationen) als auch ein passives Informationsrecht\n (ist in den internen Informationsfluss einzubeziehen). Der S-IR ist zur Durchführung ihrer\n Aufgaben jegliche erforderliche und zweckdienliche Unterstützung seitens der geprüften\n Einheit zu gewähren. Informationen und Auskünfte sind termingerecht, wahrheitsgemäß\n und vollständig zu erteilen.\n (9) In regelmäßigen Abständen sind strukturierte Jourfixe-Termine zur laufenden Abstimmung\n der Revisionstätigkeit zwischen der*dem Rektor*in und der S-IR durchzuführen.\n (10) Die S-IR kann je nach Erfordernis und Maßgabe der vorhandenen Kapazitäten externe\n Prüfvorhaben begleiten, dies gilt insbesondere für die Rechnungsabschlussprüfung und für\n die Prüfungen durch den Rechnungshof. Der S-IR sind die Prüfberichte des Rechnungshofs,\n der jährliche Bericht des Wirtschaftsprüfers über den Rechnungsabschluss sowie der\n Stellenplan zu übermitteln.\n (11) Die Leiter*innen jener Organisations- bzw. Subeinheiten, welche von externen\n Prüfinstitutionen (wie z. B. Arbeitsinspektorat, Sozialversicherung und Finanzamt) geprüft\n werden, haben die S-IR zeitnah von den geplanten Prüfvorhaben zu informieren und die\n Prüfberichte zu übermitteln.\n§ 3 Aufgaben der S-IR\nZu den Aufgaben der S-IR zählen insbesondere:\n 1. Erbringung unabhängiger und objektiver Prüfungs- und Beratungsleistungen entsprechend\n § 4.\n 2. Durchführung der laufenden Maßnahmenkontrolle gem. § 5.\n 3. Rechtzeitige Erstellung eines Vorschlags für den Jahresprüfplan des Folgejahres anhand\n einer dokumentierten Abwägung der Strategien, Risiken und Zielen der Medizinischen\n Universität Graz, sowie unter Berücksichtigung der vorhandenen Ressourcen. Der Vorschlag\n ist von der S-IR bis zum vorangehenden Jahresende an das Rektorat zu übermitteln; die\n Pioneering Minds - Research and Education for Patients‘ Health and Well-Being\n Medizinische Universität Graz, Neue Stiftingtalstraße 6, 8010 Graz, www.medunigraz.at\n Rechtsform: Juristische Person öffentlichen Rechts gem. UG 2002. Information: Mitteilungsblatt der Universität, DVR-Nr. 210 9494.\n UID: ATU57511179. Bankverbindung: UniCredit Bank Austria AG IBAN: AT931200050094840004, BIC: BKAUATWW\n Raiffeisen Landesbank Steiermark IBAN: AT443800000000049510, BIC: RZSTAT2G\n Mitteilungsblatt vom 22.01.2025, StJ 2024/25, 15. Stk. RN97" }, { "bulletin": { "id": 12875, "academic_year": "2024/25", "issue": "15", "published": "2025-01-22T00:00:00+01:00", "teaser": "Richtlinie des Rektorates: „Standards für gute wissenschaftliche Praxis“ – Änderung; Geschäftsordnung Stabsstelle Interne Revision; Satzung: Satzungsteil A. Studienrechtliche Bestimmungen – Änderung; Satzung: Satzungsteil I. Wahlordnung – Änderung; Ausschreibung von Stellen", "url": "https://online.medunigraz.at/mug_online/wbMitteilungsblaetter_neu.display?pNr=12875&pDocNr=1590955&pOrgNr=1" }, "index": 36, "text": "37\n darin vorgesehenen Prüf- bzw. Beratungsaufträge gelten mit Beschlussfassung durch das\n Rektorat als erteilt.\n 4. Unterstützung des Rektorats bei der Kooperation mit externen Prüfinstitutionen\n (insbesondere Koordination von Prüfungen durch den Rechnungshof)\n 5. Jährliche Erstellung eines Tätigkeitsberichtes bis 28.02. des Folgejahres, der nach\n Beschlussfassung durch das Rektorat auch dem Universitätsrat zur Kenntnis gebracht wird.\n Mit dem Tätigkeitsbericht wird auch Jahresprüfplan des jeweils aktuellen Jahres\n mitübermittelt. In Fällen von besonderer Relevanz hat die*der Rektor*in bzw. die S-IR im\n Auftrag der Rektorin*des Rektors dem Universitätsrat auch unterjährig zu berichten.\n 6. Weiterentwicklung der Revisionstätigkeit, regelmäßige Fort- und Weiterbildung der\n Mitarbeiter*innen\n 7. Mitarbeit im österreichweiten „Think Tank Universitäten“ des Instituts für Interne Revision\n Österreich\n § 4 Ablauf von Revisionstätigkeiten\n (1) Die Revisionstätigkeiten erfolgen entweder aufgrund des Jahresprüfplans (ordentliche\n Prüfungen bzw. „Routineprüfungen“) oder anlassbezogen per Rektoratsbeschluss\n (Sonderprüfung). Der Universitätsrat kann per schriftliche Anordnung an das Rektorat die\n Beauftragung einer Sonderprüfung erwirken.\n (2) Vor Beginn einer Prüfungshandlung ist die*der Leiter*in der zu prüfenden Einheit\n rechtzeitig schriftlich und/oder im Wege eines Erstgesprächs von der S-IR über Zweck und\n Ablauf zu informieren, um eine effiziente und effektive Prüfung zu gewährleisten. Die\n Ankündigung entfällt, wenn dadurch der Prüfungszweck/-auftrag gefährdet wird. Die\n geprüfte Einheit stellt gegebenenfalls Räumlichkeiten für die Prüfung vor Ort zur\n Verfügung. Die S-IR hat dafür zu sorgen, dass der Arbeitsablauf im Bereich der geprüften\n Einheit durch die Prüfung so wenig wie möglich beeinträchtigt wird.\n (3) Die S-IR führt die Dokumentation, die Analyse und die Bewertung der im Rahmen der\n Prüfung gewonnenen Informationen durch. Nach Abschluss der Prüfungstätigkeit findet mit\n der*dem Leiter*in der geprüften Einheit eine Schlussbesprechung über die Ergebnisse der\n Prüfung mit der Gelegenheit zur Abgabe einer Stellungnahme statt. Auf eine\n Schlussbesprechung kann verzichtet werden, wenn bereits im Zuge der Erstellung des\n Berichts die zu erörternden Sachverhalte mit den Beteiligten bzw. Betroffenen hinreichend\n besprochen wurden.\n (4) Im Prüfbericht werden insbesondere die Soll/Ist-Abweichungen, Mängel,\n Verbesserungsvorschläge und Handlungsempfehlungen dokumentiert. Der schriftliche\n Entwurf des Prüfberichts wird von der S-IR an die*den Leiter*in der geprüften Einheit bzw.\n an die Leiter*innen der Einheiten, denen das Prüfthema zuzuordnen ist, sowie –\n gegebenenfalls in Auszugsform – den Leiter*innen der ebenfalls betroffenen Einheiten zur\n abschließenden Stellungnahme innerhalb einer angemessenen Frist übermittelt. Nach\n Einarbeitung der Stellungnahme/n wird der Prüfbericht von der Leiterin*vom Leiter der S-\n IR dem Rektorat übermittelt und gegebenenfalls in der Rektoratssitzung präsentiert. Die\n Prüfberichte werden vom Rektorat beschlossen. Nach Beschlussfassung durch das Rektorat\n wird der Prüfbericht samt Handlungsempfehlungen (Maßnahmenkatalog) an die*den\n Leiter*in der geprüften Einheit bzw. an die Leiter*innen der Einheiten, denen das\n Prüfthema zuzuordnen ist, sowie – gegebenenfalls in Auszugsform – den Leiter*innen der\n ebenfalls betroffenen Einheiten übermittelt.\n Pioneering Minds - Research and Education for Patients‘ Health and Well-Being\n Medizinische Universität Graz, Neue Stiftingtalstraße 6, 8010 Graz, www.medunigraz.at\nRechtsform: Juristische Person öffentlichen Rechts gem. UG 2002. Information: Mitteilungsblatt der Universität, DVR-Nr. 210 9494.\n UID: ATU57511179. Bankverbindung: UniCredit Bank Austria AG IBAN: AT931200050094840004, BIC: BKAUATWW\n Raiffeisen Landesbank Steiermark IBAN: AT443800000000049510, BIC: RZSTAT2G\n Mitteilungsblatt vom 22.01.2025, StJ 2024/25, 15. Stk. RN97" }, { "bulletin": { "id": 12875, "academic_year": "2024/25", "issue": "15", "published": "2025-01-22T00:00:00+01:00", "teaser": "Richtlinie des Rektorates: „Standards für gute wissenschaftliche Praxis“ – Änderung; Geschäftsordnung Stabsstelle Interne Revision; Satzung: Satzungsteil A. Studienrechtliche Bestimmungen – Änderung; Satzung: Satzungsteil I. Wahlordnung – Änderung; Ausschreibung von Stellen", "url": "https://online.medunigraz.at/mug_online/wbMitteilungsblaetter_neu.display?pNr=12875&pDocNr=1590955&pOrgNr=1" }, "index": 37, "text": "38\n (5) Bei begründetem Verdacht auf dolose Handlungen kann der Ablauf gemäß § 4 Abs. 3 - 5 an\n die individuellen Anforderungen einer Sonderprüfung angepasst werden.\n § 5 Laufende Maßnahmenkontrolle\n (1) Der Maßnahmenkatalog iSd § 4 Abs. 4 hat zu jeder Handlungsempfehlung den geplanten\n Termin zu enthalten, zu dem die jeweilige Maßnahme umgesetzt sein soll, oder bei\n sofortiger Umsetzung das Datum der Wiedervorlage iSd Abs. 2.\n (2) Der Fortschritt der Umsetzung der Maßnahmen ist nach Ablauf der jeweiligen Frist von der\n S-IR zu erheben. Dies erfolgt entweder via Nachfrage bei der*dem Leiter*in der geprüften\n Einheit oder, sofern möglich, mittels Nachforschung durch die S-IR, und bedarf keines\n neuerlichen Rektoratsbeschlusses. Sofern die Umsetzung noch nicht bzw. noch nicht\n vollständig erfolgt ist, ist eine neuerliche Frist festzulegen und der geprüften Einheit\n entsprechend zu kommunizieren.\n (3) Die S-IR hat eine aktuelle Übersicht zur Nachverfolgung aller offenen Maßnahmen zu\n führen. Über fällige, noch nicht umgesetzte Maßnahmen ist das Rektorat halbjährlich zu\n informieren und gegebenenfalls die*der Leiter*in der geprüften Einheit zur Stellungnahme\n aufzufordern.\n § 6 Archivierung und Aufbewahrungsfristen\n (1) Die S-IR darf vertrauliche Informationen nur im Rahmen der Durchführung von beauftragten\n Revisionstätigkeiten verarbeiten.\n (2) Ausdrucke, die vertrauliche Informationen einschließlich personenbezogener Daten\n beinhalten, werden nach Abschluss der jeweiligen Revisionstätigkeit (Beschluss des\n Revisionsbericht durch das Rektorat) vernichtet, außer die Aufbewahrung ist für das\n Verständnis des Revisionsberichts oder zu Dokumentationszwecken erforderlich. In diesem\n Fall sind die Ausdrucke versperrt aufzubewahren.\n (3) Zehn Jahre nach Beschluss des Revisionsberichts sind sämtliche Unterlagen zur jeweiligen\n Prüfung elektronischer als auch physischer Natur zu vernichten, mit Ausnahme einer\n elektronischen Version der Revisionsberichte selbst.\n § 7 Kundmachung, Inkrafttreten und Änderungen\n (1) Diese Geschäftsordnung tritt mit dem Tag der Veröffentlichung im Mitteilungsblatt in Kraft.\n (2) Änderungen der Geschäftsordnung bedürfen zu ihrer Wirksamkeit der Beschlussfassung\n durch das Rektorat sowie der Kundmachung im Mitteilungsblatt der Medizinischen\n Universität Graz\n Pioneering Minds - Research and Education for Patients‘ Health and Well-Being\n Medizinische Universität Graz, Neue Stiftingtalstraße 6, 8010 Graz, www.medunigraz.at\nRechtsform: Juristische Person öffentlichen Rechts gem. UG 2002. Information: Mitteilungsblatt der Universität, DVR-Nr. 210 9494.\n UID: ATU57511179. Bankverbindung: UniCredit Bank Austria AG IBAN: AT931200050094840004, BIC: BKAUATWW\n Raiffeisen Landesbank Steiermark IBAN: AT443800000000049510, BIC: RZSTAT2G\n Mitteilungsblatt vom 22.01.2025, StJ 2024/25, 15. Stk. RN97" }, { "bulletin": { "id": 12875, "academic_year": "2024/25", "issue": "15", "published": "2025-01-22T00:00:00+01:00", "teaser": "Richtlinie des Rektorates: „Standards für gute wissenschaftliche Praxis“ – Änderung; Geschäftsordnung Stabsstelle Interne Revision; Satzung: Satzungsteil A. Studienrechtliche Bestimmungen – Änderung; Satzung: Satzungsteil I. Wahlordnung – Änderung; Ausschreibung von Stellen", "url": "https://online.medunigraz.at/mug_online/wbMitteilungsblaetter_neu.display?pNr=12875&pDocNr=1590955&pOrgNr=1" }, "index": 38, "text": "39\n98. Satzung: Satzungsteil A. Studienrechtliche Bestimmungen – Änderung\nDer Vorsitzende des Senates, Herr Univ.-Prof. Dr. Akos HEINEMANN, gibt bekannt, dass der Senat der\nMedizinischen Universität Graz in seiner Sitzung am 22.01.2025, auf Vorschlag des Rektorates vom\n14.01.2025 folgende Satzungsänderung beschlossen hat:\n MTBl. vom 22.01.2025, StJ 2024/25, 15. Stk\nFür die inhaltliche Richtigkeit sowie die sprachliche und grafische Ausgestaltung zeichnet das/der verfassende Gremium/Organ/Funktionsträger des\nim MTBl. zu veröffentlichenden Textes verantwortlich." } ] }