NTNU, NCFM & 2012 NTNU Thesis
NCFM eSnurra Group Member Inger Økland's 2012 NTNU dr.philos. Thesis
There is a plethora of evidence within Økland's 2012 NTNU dr.philos. Thesis to demonstrate Økland and her 2012 NTNU dr.philos. Thesis fall well outside of the the ethos of scholarship, academic integrity and independence required of an NTNU doctoral thesis. There are serious questions with respect to the 4 "joint works," i.e., the 4 NCFM eSnurra Group papers included within Økland's 2012 NTNU dr.philos. Thesis which contain a total of 20 authorship credits among 8 NCFM eSnurra Group authors. Furthermore, Økland's 2012 NTNU dr.philos. Thesis is replete with intentional acts of omission and distortions of important, highly relevant facts, information and issues. Consequently, Økland's 2012 NTNU dr.philos. Thesis resulted in a publication which is more akin to an agenda-driven, competitive medico-marketing publication, with Økland acting like an agent for NCFM eSnurra Group's agenda, instead of a doctoral thesis meeting NTNU's ethos of scholarship, academic integrity and independence requirements.
The eSnurra Facebook page promotes Økland's 2012 NTNU Thesis defense (see image below). Interestingly, eSnurra is identified as a "Medical Company in Trondheim, Norway" on the eSnurra Facebook page (https://www.facebook.com/pg/esnurra/). The National Center for Fetal Medicine's eSnurra website (http://www.nsfm.no/esnurra/) is not identified on the eSnurra Facebook page. The eSnurra Facebook page neither mentions nor identifies any association between eSnurra and the Norwegian National Center for Fetal Medicine (NSFM/NCFM) or St Olavs Hospital (Trondheim University Hospital). In short, "eSnurra" is presented and promoted as a private "Medical Company" on Facebook, consistent with the copyright of "eSnurra" claimed by 3 individuals (© eSnurra, Eik-Nes, Gjessing og Grøttum), the 3 original members of NCFM eSnurra Group who were also the 3 supervisors of Inger Økland's 2012 NTNU Thesis (image below).
There is a plethora of evidence within Økland's 2012 NTNU dr.philos. Thesis to demonstrate Økland and her 2012 NTNU dr.philos. Thesis fall well outside of the the ethos of scholarship, academic integrity and independence required of an NTNU doctoral thesis. There are serious questions with respect to the 4 "joint works," i.e., the 4 NCFM eSnurra Group papers included within Økland's 2012 NTNU dr.philos. Thesis which contain a total of 20 authorship credits among 8 NCFM eSnurra Group authors. Furthermore, Økland's 2012 NTNU dr.philos. Thesis is replete with intentional acts of omission and distortions of important, highly relevant facts, information and issues. Consequently, Økland's 2012 NTNU dr.philos. Thesis resulted in a publication which is more akin to an agenda-driven, competitive medico-marketing publication, with Økland acting like an agent for NCFM eSnurra Group's agenda, instead of a doctoral thesis meeting NTNU's ethos of scholarship, academic integrity and independence requirements.
The eSnurra Facebook page promotes Økland's 2012 NTNU Thesis defense (see image below). Interestingly, eSnurra is identified as a "Medical Company in Trondheim, Norway" on the eSnurra Facebook page (https://www.facebook.com/pg/esnurra/). The National Center for Fetal Medicine's eSnurra website (http://www.nsfm.no/esnurra/) is not identified on the eSnurra Facebook page. The eSnurra Facebook page neither mentions nor identifies any association between eSnurra and the Norwegian National Center for Fetal Medicine (NSFM/NCFM) or St Olavs Hospital (Trondheim University Hospital). In short, "eSnurra" is presented and promoted as a private "Medical Company" on Facebook, consistent with the copyright of "eSnurra" claimed by 3 individuals (© eSnurra, Eik-Nes, Gjessing og Grøttum), the 3 original members of NCFM eSnurra Group who were also the 3 supervisors of Inger Økland's 2012 NTNU Thesis (image below).
(Source: eSnurra Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/pg/esnurra/)
Also, it is interesting to note Økland's 2012 NTNU dr.philos. Thesis was, and remains, identified as a competitive medico-marketing publication in the very first sentence of NCFM eSnurra Group's webpage: "Publications about eSnurra" as follows:
Inger Økland remains prominently featured on the www.esnurra.com homepage where NCFM eSnurra Group intentionally misrepresent Inger Økland's academic credentials. Specifically, NCFM eSnurra Group intentionally misrepresent NTNU had conferred a PhD degree upon Inger Økland instead of a dr.philos degree. Also, NCFM eSnurra Group intentionally misrepresent Okland's Thesis as an NTNU PhD Thesis/Dissertation. There is a big difference between an NTNU PhD degree and an NTNU dr.philos. degree, just as there is a big difference between an NTNU PhD Thesis/Dissertation and an NTNU dr.philos. Thesis. The intentional, deceptive misrepresentation of Økland's academic credentials is made obvious by what it stated stated on page 3 of Økland's 2012 NTNU dr.philos. Thesis: "Principal Supervisor: Sturla H. Eik-Nes, MD, PhD , Co-supervisors: Håkon K. Gjessing, PhD & Per Grøttum, MD, PhD." Moreover, these same 3 NCFM eSnurra Group members are the 3 claimed copyright owners of NCFM eSnurra (© 2017 eSnurra / Eik-Nes, Gjessing and Grøttum), as stated on the "eSnurra" website (www.esnurra.com). Attributing the iconic degree credential "PhD" to Økland and her thesis is a blatant misrepresentation. NTNU conferred a dr.philos. degree upon Inger Økland in 2012, not a PhD degree. This blatant misrepresentation of academic credentials is a breach of medical ethics for doctors; and although this is not stated in her thesis, Inger Økland was, and is, a medical doctor.
Consequently, there was, and remains, confusion regarding Økland's 2012 NTNU dr.philos. Thesis, on multiple levels. Most people were intentionally led to believe Økland had been conferred an NTNU PhD as a result of 2 articles published in Tidsskr Nor Legeforen.
Public Misrepresentation of Inger Økland's Academic Credentials
The first public misrepresentation was included in the 2012 NTNU PhD degree announcements (included below).
The second, was by Torunn Janbu, Head of the Department of Hospital Services, Norwegian Directorate of Health, in her article "One Norwegian national tool for estimating date of delivery and fetal age" in Tidsskr Nor Legeforen nr. 9, 2016; 136: 790 – 1, p. 790. In this article, Torunn Janbu represented Økland's 2012 NTNU dr.philos. Thesis as independent, academic justification for Directorate of Health's decision to select NCFM eSnurra Group's "method" (i.e., the appropriated, plagiarized, misused Hutchon Method of PDEE) as the exclusive implementation vehicle for Directorate of Health's medically & ethically flawed 2014 Recommendation with their government-mandated protocol of evidence-obviated medicine.
Torunn Janbu's misrepresentation of Økland's academic credentials was a breach of Norwegian Medical Association's Code of Ethics for Doctors given that both Inger Økland and Torunn Janbu are Medical Doctors. The following excerpt is from the Norwegian Medical Association (Den norske legeforening) website "Code of Ethics for Doctors Adopted by the Representative Body in 1961 and subsequently amended, most recently in 2015." (Source: http://legeforeningen.no/om-legeforeningen/organisasjonen/rad-og-utvalg/organisasjonspolitiske-utvalg/etikk/code-of-ethics-for-doctors-/)
No Evidence of a Request for Correction
There is no evidence corrections were requested of Tidsskrift for Den norske legeforening by Inger Økland, or Torun Janbu, or Jens Grøgaard, or Sturla H. Eik-Ness (NCFM eSnurra Group leader and Økland's Principal Thesis Supervisor). If the Editor of Tidsskrift for Den norske legeforening had been informed of the need for "a correction of a statement of a factual nature" in 2 separate articles, published in 2 separate issues of Tidsskrift for Den norske legeforening (nr. 3, 2012; 132 and nr. 9, 2016; 136), of which both articles were in need of the exact same factual corrections, i.e., the degree NTNU had actually conferred upon Inger Økland and the degree which had been attributed to Økland's Thesis had been attributed, an NTNU dr.philos. degree, not an NTNU PhD degree, then the Editor of Tidsskrift for Den norske legeforening would have been bound by Norwegian law to publish timely corrections. It is not likely nor is there evidence to suggest the Editor of Tidsskrift for Den norske legeforening received 2 separate requests for "a correction of a statement of a factual nature" and then twice ignored Norwegian law (below).
Intentional, On-going Misrepresentation by NCFM eSnurra Group
Furthermore, Økland's 2012 NTNU dr.philos. Thesis states (p. 3): "Principal Supervisor: Sturla H. Eik-Nes Bive, Co-supervisors: Håkon K. Gjessing and Per Grøttum; the 3 original members of the NCFM eSnurra Group; the 3 coauthors of NCFM eSnurra Group's Eik-Nes et al. 2005 and Gjessing et al. 2007 the first 2 NCFM eSnurra Group publications to have appropriated and plagiarized Dr. Hutchon's original idea and method, the Hutchon Method of PDEE; the 3 NCFM eSnurra Group members who claim to be the NCFM eSnurra "copyright owners" (© 2007 Eik-Nes, Grøttum og Gjessing). Moreover, Økland had been working and publishing with NCFM eSnurra Group since 2007. Consequently, Økland and her 2012 NTNU dr.philos. Thesis did not represent independent academic scholarship and were clear, direct conflicts of interest. Finally, it is interesting to note while Torunn Janbu misrepresented Økland's academic credentials, she decided not to identify Økland's MD credential with a specialty in obstetrics, which was strange given obstetric medicine was (and remains) the primary issues regarding Directorate of Health's knowledge-obviated, medically & ethically flawed 2014 Recommendation. And, finally, Torunn Janbu did not identify Inger Økland as a member of NCFM eSnurra Group nor did she disclose that Økland's 2012 NTNU dr.philos. Thesis had been supervised by Eik-Nes, Per Grøttum and Håkon K. Gjessing, the 3 NCFM eSnurra Group members who claim to be the "copyright owners" of the NCFM eSnurra "method" (i.e., the appropriated, plagiarized, misused Hutchon Method of PDEE). Nor did Torunn Janbu disclose Jens Grøgaard, Senior Adviser, Directorate of Health had been a member of Økland's 2012 NTNU dr.philos. Thesis Assessment Committee and had adjudicated Økland's public defense.
However, in the article "Feilkilder ved ultralydbasert terminfastsettelse i 2. trimester, relatert til prediksjonsmodeller og målinger" in Flaggermusen, Inger Økland's degree is identified as "dr.philos." And, in Inger Økland's personal profile at ResearchGate.net her degree is identified as "Dr. Philos." Moreover, Økland's 2012 NTNU dr.philos. Thesis states: "Thesis for the degree of Doctor Philosophiae" on the front cover/page which corresponds to the NTNU Doctor Philosophiae (dr.philos.) degree, not the Philosophiae Doctor (PhD) degree. And, the Bibsys NTNU Open: Full Item Record: Inger Økland's 2012 NTNU Doctoral Thesis has the following table entry: "dc.description.degree Dr.philos."
There are 4 items of evidence to support NTNU conferred a dr.philos. degree upon Økland and 3 items of evidence to support NTNU conferred a PhD degree. However, the considerable reach of the 2 PhD ascribing articles in Tidsskrift for Den norske legeforening dwarf all publication-based communication channels with the message NTNU had conferred a dr.philos. degree upon Økland, not the PhD degree promoted in the article by Torunn Janbu of Directorate of Health and the Degree Announcements article, both published in Tidsskrift for Den norske legeforening.
- "...and doctoral [i.e., Økland's 2012 NTNU dr.philos. Thesis] that tests how the methodology stands against competing methods."
- "Inger Økland's works are featured in the Norwegian Association of Ultrasound Diagnostics' magazine Flaggermusen –https://www.thieme-connect.de/ejournals/pdf/10.1055/s-0032-1318928.pdf" [However, this URL is no longer; it returns the message: "Not Found The requested URL /ejournals/pdf/10.1055/s-0032-1318928.pdf was not found on this server"]
- "Feilkilder ved ultralydbasert terminfastsettelse i 2. trimester, relatert til prediksjonsmodeller og målinger" in Ultraschall in Med - NFUD Flaggermusen 2012; 33(5): 508. DOI: 10.1055/s-0032-1318928. URL: URL: https://www.thieme-connect.com/products/ejournals/html/10.1055/s-0032-1318928. Notice the word "products" as a directory name in this URL ]
- "Feilkilder ved ultralydbasert terminfastsettelse i 2. trimester, relatert til prediksjonsmodeller og målinger" in Ultraschall in der Medizin - European Journal of Ultrasound 2012; 33(05): 508 - 508. DOI: 10.1055/s-0032-1318928. URL: https://eref.thieme.de/ejournals/1438-8782_2012_05#/10.1055-s-0032-1318928
Inger Økland remains prominently featured on the www.esnurra.com homepage where NCFM eSnurra Group intentionally misrepresent Inger Økland's academic credentials. Specifically, NCFM eSnurra Group intentionally misrepresent NTNU had conferred a PhD degree upon Inger Økland instead of a dr.philos degree. Also, NCFM eSnurra Group intentionally misrepresent Okland's Thesis as an NTNU PhD Thesis/Dissertation. There is a big difference between an NTNU PhD degree and an NTNU dr.philos. degree, just as there is a big difference between an NTNU PhD Thesis/Dissertation and an NTNU dr.philos. Thesis. The intentional, deceptive misrepresentation of Økland's academic credentials is made obvious by what it stated stated on page 3 of Økland's 2012 NTNU dr.philos. Thesis: "Principal Supervisor: Sturla H. Eik-Nes, MD, PhD , Co-supervisors: Håkon K. Gjessing, PhD & Per Grøttum, MD, PhD." Moreover, these same 3 NCFM eSnurra Group members are the 3 claimed copyright owners of NCFM eSnurra (© 2017 eSnurra / Eik-Nes, Gjessing and Grøttum), as stated on the "eSnurra" website (www.esnurra.com). Attributing the iconic degree credential "PhD" to Økland and her thesis is a blatant misrepresentation. NTNU conferred a dr.philos. degree upon Inger Økland in 2012, not a PhD degree. This blatant misrepresentation of academic credentials is a breach of medical ethics for doctors; and although this is not stated in her thesis, Inger Økland was, and is, a medical doctor.
- "Is the method tested?
There are several articles published and a PhD showing that eSnurra is more accurate than other methods used and has been used in Norway." (Source: www.esnurra.com)
Consequently, there was, and remains, confusion regarding Økland's 2012 NTNU dr.philos. Thesis, on multiple levels. Most people were intentionally led to believe Økland had been conferred an NTNU PhD as a result of 2 articles published in Tidsskr Nor Legeforen.
Public Misrepresentation of Inger Økland's Academic Credentials
The first public misrepresentation was included in the 2012 NTNU PhD degree announcements (included below).
- Degree Announcements: "Doktoravhandlinger" Nr. 3, 7. februar 2012, Tidsskrift for Den norske legeforening 2012; 132
"Inger Økland, ph.d. Biases in second-trimester ultrasound dating related to prediction models and fetal measurements. Utgår fra Institutt for laboratoriemedisin, barne- og kvinnesykdommer. Disputas 13.1. 2012.
Bedømmelseskomité: Zarko Alfirevic, University of Liverpool, Storbritannia, Jens Grøgaard, Helsedirektoratet og Liv Bente Romundstad, Norges teknisk-naturvitenskapelige universitet.
Veiledere: Sturla Eik-Nes, Håkon K. Gjessing og Per Grøttum." (Source: "Doktoravhandlinger" Nr. 3, 7. februar 2012, Tidsskrift for Den norske legeforening 2012; 132:)
The second, was by Torunn Janbu, Head of the Department of Hospital Services, Norwegian Directorate of Health, in her article "One Norwegian national tool for estimating date of delivery and fetal age" in Tidsskr Nor Legeforen nr. 9, 2016; 136: 790 – 1, p. 790. In this article, Torunn Janbu represented Økland's 2012 NTNU dr.philos. Thesis as independent, academic justification for Directorate of Health's decision to select NCFM eSnurra Group's "method" (i.e., the appropriated, plagiarized, misused Hutchon Method of PDEE) as the exclusive implementation vehicle for Directorate of Health's medically & ethically flawed 2014 Recommendation with their government-mandated protocol of evidence-obviated medicine.
- "This was done in a PhD thesis in 2012 (2), and the work has been presented in three international publications (7 – 9). The PhD thesis undertook validation studies of three different term prediction models: Snurra (phased out in 2007), Terminhjulet and eSnurra." (Source: One Norwegian national tool for estimating date of delivery and fetal age, Torunn Janbu (born 1954), MD, PhD, specialist in general and orthopaedic surgery, head of the Department of Hospital Services, Norwegian Directorate of Health. The author has completed the ICMJE form and declares no conflicts of interest. Tidsskr Nor Legeforen nr. 9, 2016; 136: 790 – 1, p. 790)
"Dette er gjort i en doktoravhandling fra 2012 (2). Arbeidet er presentert i tre internasjonale publikasjoner (7 – 9). I doktorgraden er det gjort valideringsstudier av tre ulike prediksjonsmodeller: Snurra (utfaset i 2007), Terminhjulet og eSnurra." (Source: Nasjonalt verktøy for bestemmelseav termin og fosteralder, Torunn Janbu (f. 1954) er dr.med., spesialist i generell kirurgi og i ortopedisk kirurgi og avdelingsdirektør i Avdeling sykehustjenester, Helsedirektoratet. Forfatter har fylt ut ICMJE-skjemaet og oppgir ingen interessekonflikter. Tidsskr Nor Legeforen nr. 9, 2016; 136: 790 – 1, p. 790)
Torunn Janbu's misrepresentation of Økland's academic credentials was a breach of Norwegian Medical Association's Code of Ethics for Doctors given that both Inger Økland and Torunn Janbu are Medical Doctors. The following excerpt is from the Norwegian Medical Association (Den norske legeforening) website "Code of Ethics for Doctors Adopted by the Representative Body in 1961 and subsequently amended, most recently in 2015." (Source: http://legeforeningen.no/om-legeforeningen/organisasjonen/rad-og-utvalg/organisasjonspolitiske-utvalg/etikk/code-of-ethics-for-doctors-/)
- III. Marketing and other information concerning medical services
§ 4 A doctor may only use such titles and designations as his or her education and position entitle him to.
He or she may not use titles and designations which may give an erroneous impression of his or her qualifications and work.
No Evidence of a Request for Correction
There is no evidence corrections were requested of Tidsskrift for Den norske legeforening by Inger Økland, or Torun Janbu, or Jens Grøgaard, or Sturla H. Eik-Ness (NCFM eSnurra Group leader and Økland's Principal Thesis Supervisor). If the Editor of Tidsskrift for Den norske legeforening had been informed of the need for "a correction of a statement of a factual nature" in 2 separate articles, published in 2 separate issues of Tidsskrift for Den norske legeforening (nr. 3, 2012; 132 and nr. 9, 2016; 136), of which both articles were in need of the exact same factual corrections, i.e., the degree NTNU had actually conferred upon Inger Økland and the degree which had been attributed to Økland's Thesis had been attributed, an NTNU dr.philos. degree, not an NTNU PhD degree, then the Editor of Tidsskrift for Den norske legeforening would have been bound by Norwegian law to publish timely corrections. It is not likely nor is there evidence to suggest the Editor of Tidsskrift for Den norske legeforening received 2 separate requests for "a correction of a statement of a factual nature" and then twice ignored Norwegian law (below).
- The General Civil Penal Code
Chapter 43. Misdemeanours in printed matter
"Section 430. The editor of a newspaper or periodical shall be liable to fines if he refuses to print unaltered a correction of a statement of a factual nature in the newspaper or periodical if this is requested within one year by any person whom the statement directly concerns and the correction is limited to a statement of a factual nature and does not contain anything of a criminal nature. The editor may, moreover, be enjoined, by means of a continuous daily fine, to print the correction.
A refusal is deemed to have been made if the correction is not published in the first or second issue of a newspaper, or the first issue of a periodical which was not ready for printing when the correction was requested, in as prominent a place as the statement to be corrected and generally made up in such a way as is required by good press usage.
A public prosecution will only be instituted when requested by the aggrieved person." (Source: "Act of 22 May 1902 No. 10, The General Civil Penal Code" With subsequent amendments, the latest made by Act of 21 December 2005 No. 131. Det Kongelige Justis- Og Politidepartment, Ministry of Justice and the Police. p. 136)
- an NTNU PhD Thesis given the fact NTNU had conferred a dr.philos. degree upon Inger Økland,
- the only, allegedly, "independent," academic justification used by Directorate of Health to select NCFM eSnurra Group's "method" (i.e., the appropriated, plagiarized Hutchon Method of PDEE)
- the only publicly available document identified by Directorate of Health to justify their selection of NCFM eSnurra Group's "method."
Intentional, On-going Misrepresentation by NCFM eSnurra Group
Furthermore, Økland's 2012 NTNU dr.philos. Thesis states (p. 3): "Principal Supervisor: Sturla H. Eik-Nes Bive, Co-supervisors: Håkon K. Gjessing and Per Grøttum; the 3 original members of the NCFM eSnurra Group; the 3 coauthors of NCFM eSnurra Group's Eik-Nes et al. 2005 and Gjessing et al. 2007 the first 2 NCFM eSnurra Group publications to have appropriated and plagiarized Dr. Hutchon's original idea and method, the Hutchon Method of PDEE; the 3 NCFM eSnurra Group members who claim to be the NCFM eSnurra "copyright owners" (© 2007 Eik-Nes, Grøttum og Gjessing). Moreover, Økland had been working and publishing with NCFM eSnurra Group since 2007. Consequently, Økland and her 2012 NTNU dr.philos. Thesis did not represent independent academic scholarship and were clear, direct conflicts of interest. Finally, it is interesting to note while Torunn Janbu misrepresented Økland's academic credentials, she decided not to identify Økland's MD credential with a specialty in obstetrics, which was strange given obstetric medicine was (and remains) the primary issues regarding Directorate of Health's knowledge-obviated, medically & ethically flawed 2014 Recommendation. And, finally, Torunn Janbu did not identify Inger Økland as a member of NCFM eSnurra Group nor did she disclose that Økland's 2012 NTNU dr.philos. Thesis had been supervised by Eik-Nes, Per Grøttum and Håkon K. Gjessing, the 3 NCFM eSnurra Group members who claim to be the "copyright owners" of the NCFM eSnurra "method" (i.e., the appropriated, plagiarized, misused Hutchon Method of PDEE). Nor did Torunn Janbu disclose Jens Grøgaard, Senior Adviser, Directorate of Health had been a member of Økland's 2012 NTNU dr.philos. Thesis Assessment Committee and had adjudicated Økland's public defense.
However, in the article "Feilkilder ved ultralydbasert terminfastsettelse i 2. trimester, relatert til prediksjonsmodeller og målinger" in Flaggermusen, Inger Økland's degree is identified as "dr.philos." And, in Inger Økland's personal profile at ResearchGate.net her degree is identified as "Dr. Philos." Moreover, Økland's 2012 NTNU dr.philos. Thesis states: "Thesis for the degree of Doctor Philosophiae" on the front cover/page which corresponds to the NTNU Doctor Philosophiae (dr.philos.) degree, not the Philosophiae Doctor (PhD) degree. And, the Bibsys NTNU Open: Full Item Record: Inger Økland's 2012 NTNU Doctoral Thesis has the following table entry: "dc.description.degree Dr.philos."
- According to NTNU's: "REGULATIONS FOR THE PHILOSOPHIAE DOCTOR DEGREE (PHD) AT THE NORWEGIAN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY (NTNU)" a Philosophiae Doctor is the "PhD" degree and
- According to NTNU's: REGULATIONS FOR THE DEGREE DOCTOR PHILOSOPHIAE (DR.PHILOS.) AT THE NORWEGIAN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY (NTNU) a Doctor Philosophiae is the "dr. philos." degree.
There are 4 items of evidence to support NTNU conferred a dr.philos. degree upon Økland and 3 items of evidence to support NTNU conferred a PhD degree. However, the considerable reach of the 2 PhD ascribing articles in Tidsskrift for Den norske legeforening dwarf all publication-based communication channels with the message NTNU had conferred a dr.philos. degree upon Økland, not the PhD degree promoted in the article by Torunn Janbu of Directorate of Health and the Degree Announcements article, both published in Tidsskrift for Den norske legeforening.
- NTNU states: "A PhD degree is the highest level of formalized education in Norway."
(Source: NTNU website: https://www.ntnu.edu/phd) - NTNU states: "It is possible to complete a doctoral degree outside of a structured PhD education. This is called a dr.philos. degree and is a completely independent non-supervised academic work where your first formal contact with the university will be upon handing in your thesis." (Source: NTNU website: https://www.ntnu.edu/phd)
Norwegian Association of Higher Education Institutions (UHR)
"The Norwegian Association of Higher Education Institutions (UHR) is the most important cooperative body for Norwegian universities and colleges, whose purpose it is to develop Norway as a knowledge-based nation of high international standard." (Source: Universitets- og høgskolerådet (UHR)
Guidelines for the Evaluation of Candidates for Norwegian Doctoral Degrees
"1. Regulations and supplementary provisions
The evaluation of scientific theses submitted towards doctoral degrees at Norwegian universities and university colleges is regulated by:
Økland's 2012 NTNU dr.philos. Degree Requirements:
NTNU conferred a Doctor Philosophiae (dr.philos.) degree upon Økland. Consequently, Økland was required to adhere to the associated NTNU regulations for a dr.philos. degree, as defined in NTNU's published "REGULATIONS CONCERNING THE DOCTOR PHILOSOPHIAE DEGREE (DR. PHILOS.) AT THE NORWEGIAN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY (NTNU)" Included below are important, highly relevant excerpts from the NTNU dr.philos. degree regulations which applied to Økland's 2012 NTNU dr.philos. Thesis and degree.
"The Norwegian Association of Higher Education Institutions (UHR) is the most important cooperative body for Norwegian universities and colleges, whose purpose it is to develop Norway as a knowledge-based nation of high international standard." (Source: Universitets- og høgskolerådet (UHR)
Guidelines for the Evaluation of Candidates for Norwegian Doctoral Degrees
"1. Regulations and supplementary provisions
The evaluation of scientific theses submitted towards doctoral degrees at Norwegian universities and university colleges is regulated by:
- the regulations of the respective institutions for the degree of Philosophiae Doctor (PhD) and supplementary provisions to these regulations;
- the regulations of the respective institutions for the degree of Dr. philos."
(Source: Guidelines for the Evaluation of Candidates for Norwegian Doctoral Degrees Recommended by the Norwegian Association of Higher Education Institutions 23 March 2007. Universitets- og høgskolerådet (UHR)
Økland's 2012 NTNU dr.philos. Degree Requirements:
NTNU conferred a Doctor Philosophiae (dr.philos.) degree upon Økland. Consequently, Økland was required to adhere to the associated NTNU regulations for a dr.philos. degree, as defined in NTNU's published "REGULATIONS CONCERNING THE DOCTOR PHILOSOPHIAE DEGREE (DR. PHILOS.) AT THE NORWEGIAN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY (NTNU)" Included below are important, highly relevant excerpts from the NTNU dr.philos. degree regulations which applied to Økland's 2012 NTNU dr.philos. Thesis and degree.
- Section 1 Objectives
"Dr. philos. is a non-supervised degree."
Note: Økland's 2012 NTNU dr.philos. Thesis explicitly states (p. 3, bottom) it was supervised by Sturla H. Eik-Nes and co-supervised by Håkon K. Gjessing and Per Grøttum; the 3 original members of NCFM eSnurra Group, the 3 NCFM eSnurra Group members who claim to be the NCFM eSnurra "copyright owners" (© 2007 Eik-Nes, Grøttum og Gjessing); the 3 coauthors of NCFM eSnurra Group's Eik-Nes et al. 2005 and Gjessing et al. 2007, the first 2 NCFM eSnurra Group publications which appropriated and plagiarized Dr. Hutchon's original idea and method, the Hutchon Method of PDEE, and claimed Dr. Hutchon's original idea and method as their own original idea and method. However, Økland's 2012 NTNU dr.philos. Thesis and degree were defined by NTNU as a "non-supervised degree," unlike the NTNU PhD degree which is fully supervised. Moreover, Økland was not entitled to NTNU supervision, nor any thesis supervision, nor was it even possible because her application and her "doctoral degree thesis" were required to be submitted together on her first contact with NTNU. - "Dr.philos. is a completely independent study where you are not entitled to supervision, organized academic training, a work place or other assistance from the university. Writing a dr.philos.-thesis is usually completed on your own time and you only get in touch with NTNU once the thesis is finished and ready to be handed in." (Source: NTNU website: Dr.philos.)
- NTNU states: "A PhD degree is the highest level of formalized education in Norway." (Source: NTNU website: https://www.ntnu.edu/phd)
- Section 2 The right to apply
"The application is to be submitted together with the doctoral degree thesis. (To whom was Økland's application and Doctoral Thesis submitted?)"
"The Faculty is to evaluate the applicant’s qualifications and reach a decision based on the documentation of previous studies and scientific work, cf. Section 5." [Who were the "Faculty?"] - Section 3 Thesis
"Part of a joint work may be approved for evaluation (also as one of several pieces of work, cf. Section 4), provided that the candidate’s contribution represents an independent contribution that can be identified. A thesis containing pieces of work written by more than one author is to include a signed declaration that describes the contribution by the candidate and the co-author(s) of each piece of work, and the consent of the co-author(s). It must be possible to identify the candidate’s independent contribution in the work." (Source: NTNU Website:
https://www.ntnu.no/studieavd/dok/regulations_drphilos.pdf
Applying these NTNU regulations to Økland's Doctoral Thesis yields the following:
- Part of a joint work may be approved for evaluation also as one of several pieces of work. Note: The 3 published and 1 unpublished papers included in Økland's 2012 NTNU dr.philos. Thesis had a total of 20 authorship credits, among 8 authors.
- The 3 published and 1 unpublished papers in Økland's Doctoral Thesis, as submitted, are each a joint work.
- Part of a joint work may be approved for evaluation. (How were Økland's joint workparts identified within each of the 4 joint works? Who evaluated each of Økland's parts in the 4 joint works? Who approved each of Økland's parts among the 4 joint works?)
- Økland's contribution to each of the 4 joint works must represent an independent contribution that can be identified. (Note: Økland's 2012 NTNU dr.philos. Thesis presented by NTNU Library as an original on 11.05.2017 did not identify Økland's independent contributions to the joint works as required by NTNU's regulations.
- Økland's Doctoral Thesis must include a signed declaration for each joint work that describes: 1) Økland's contribution and 2) the contributions of each of her 16 co-authors.
[Note: Økland's 2012 NTNU dr.philos. Thesis presented by NTNU Library as an original on 11.05.2017 does not include the signed declarations required by NTNU's regulations. This begs a few questions: Why was Økland allowed to violate and circumvent NTNU's regulations requiring inclusion of the 4 joint work declarations in her 2012 NTNU dr.philos. Thesis? Who at NTNU allowed this violation and circumvention and why?] - Each signed declaration for each of the 4 joint works must have the consent of each of the coauthors (i.e., Økland's 16 coauthors) (Note: Why were these signed declarations and consents not made and included in Økland's 2012 NTNU dr.philos. Thesis, as required by NTNU's regulations?) [Note: Økland's 7 co-authors included: H. K. Gjessing, P. Grøttum, S. H. Eik-Nes, T. M. Eggebø, J. Nakling, T. G. Bjåstad & T. F. Johansen]
- Note: The first 3 co-authors listed above are the original members of NCFM eSnurra Group and the 3 claimed copyright owners of NCFM eSnurra (© 2007 Eik-Nes, Grøttum og Gjessing).
- Moreover, these same 3 NCFM eSnurra Group members (Eik-Nes, Grøttum og Gjessing) are identified as Økland's thesis supervisors.
- Section 5 Submission of the thesis
"Five (5) copies of the thesis, bound or stitched, are to be submitted."
"A piece of work that has been submitted cannot be withdrawn until a final decision is reached as to whether or not it may be approved for defense for the doctoral degree."
(Note: Was the professionally printed thesis that was provided by NTNU Library as original on 11.05.2017 one of the "five (5) copies of the thesis" Økland submitted to NTNU with her application? At the time, Økland was required by NTNU's regulations to submit her application and her thesis together. This begs the question: Did Økland have her thesis professionally printed in volume before she had submitted it?) - Section 7.2 Revision of a submitted thesis
"If the committee finds that extensive changes related to the theory, hypothesis, material or methods used in the thesis are needed in order to deem the thesis worthy of a public defence, the committee must reject the thesis." - Section 10.2 Public availability
"The thesis must be made available to the public no later than three (3) weeks prior to the date of the public defence. The thesis should be made available in the form in which it was submitted for assessment, or following revisions made on the basis of the committee’s preliminary comments; cf. Section 7.2."
"No restrictions may be placed on a dr. philos. thesis being made publicly available."
Authorship Credit
It is important to revisit paragraph 5 of "Section 3 Thesis" of NTNU's Doctor Philosophiae (dr.philos.) thesis regulations and degree. It is interesting and disturbing to note Økland's 2012 NTNU dr.philos. Thesis, as presented by NTNU Library as an original copy on 11.05.2017, did not meet NTNU's regulations as stated in "Section 3 Thesis".
- Section 3 Thesis
"Part of a joint work may be approved for evaluation (also as one of several pieces of work, cf. Section 4), provided that the candidate’s contribution represents an independent contribution that can be identified. A thesis containing pieces of work written by more than one author is to include a signed declaration that describes the contribution by the candidate and the co-author(s) of each piece of work, and the consent of the co-author(s). It must be possible to identify the candidate’s independent contribution in the work."
NTNU's regulations for a dr.philos. degree required signed declarations for each joint work in an NTNU dr.philos. thesis.
- "authorship does not communicate what contributions qualified an individual to be an author." (Source: International Committee of Medical Journal Editors; (ICMJE), below)
- "Because authorship does not communicate what contributions qualified an individual to be an author, some journals now request and publish information about the contributions of each person named as having participated in a submitted study, at least for original research. Editors are strongly encouraged to develop and implement a contributorship policy. Such policies remove much of the ambiguity surrounding contributions, but leave unresolved the question of the quantity and quality of contribution that qualify an individual for authorship." (Source: International Committee of Medical Journal Editors, "Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals Updated December 2016" p. 2, http://www.icmje.org/ & http://www.icmje.org/icmje-recommendations.pdf, resectively)
- "is defined as co-authorship awarded to a person who has not contributed significantly to the study." NTNU's regulations required signed declarations for each joint work to be included in an NTNU dr.philos. thesis to prevent gift authorship and to ensure an NTNU dr.philos. thesis was not used as a vehicle for gift authorship or as a vehicle for unethical pursuits. Gift authorship is research misconduct via falsification. (Source: "Gift authorship - A cause for concern" Syed Ahmed Zaki, Lung India 2011 Jul-Sep; 28(3): 232–233. doi: 10.4103/0970-2113.83994)
- Gift Authorship
"There are three reasons why gift authorship is regarded as unethical. First, a publication that is not genuinely earned may falsely represent the individual's expertise. Second, due to gift authorship, the person is perceived as being more skilled than his colleague who has not published. This gives the person an unfair advantage professionally over his colleague while applying for jobs or appearing for an interview or for promotion. Finally, such an individual is perceived to have a false level of competence and will be expected to accomplish tasks that may be outside the range of his expertise. In conclusion, gift authorship should be strongly discouraged in medical writing. The authorship credit and order should be based on the relative scholarly abilities and professional contributions of the collaborators." (Source: "Gift authorship - A cause for concern" Syed Ahmed Zaki, Lung India 2011 Jul-Sep; 28(3): 232–233. doi: 10.4103/0970-2113.83994)
The obvious question: Who at NTNU allowed Økland and her dr.philos. thesis to subvert NTNU's regulations and requirements? Specifically, "Section 3 Thesis" of the regulations and requirements clearly and explicitly stated that a signed declaration for each of the 4 joint works (i.e., a total of 20 authorship credits among 8 total authors) were to be included within Økland's 2012 NTNU dr.philos.
Research Misconduct & Academic Fraud: Ethos of Scholarship, Academic Integrity & Independence
The colored text used in the excerpts below serves to identify the appropriation and plagiarism of the "Introduction" of Dr. Hutchon's seminal Hutchon 1998 into the "Introduction" of Økland's 2012 NTNU dr.philos. Thesis. Specifically, Økland:
- appropriated and plagiarized the idea and approach used in the introduction to her 2012 dr.philos thesis from Dr. Hutchon's seminal Hutchon 1998, published 14-years earlier, to introduce his original idea and method, the Hutchon Method of Population-based Direct EDD Estimation (PDEE); the method upon which Økland's 2012 NTNU dr.philos. Thesis was based, entirely, without attribution to Dr. Hutchon for the Hutchon Method of PDEE.
- used the same 4 historical figures: Aristotle, William Harvey, Hermanni Boerhaave and Franz Carl Naegele/Nägele and
- used the same historical quotations regarding the ideas, methods and contributions of these historical figures
- Introduction: Dr. Hutchon's Seminal 1998 Paper
Aristotle, the father of scientific thinking, wrote that there was a certain definite term of gestation for all animals which varied from animal to animal according to its size and life expectancy. However in man, wrote the philosopher, "the human foetus is expelled both in the seventh and tenth months, and at any period of pregnancy between these; moreover, when the birth takes place in the eighth month it is possible for the infant to live." (Harvey 1647) William Harvey, writing in the early 17th century, thought that women were most prone to conceive either just before or just after the menstrual flux. It was however Harmanni Boerhaave (1744) who formulated a way of calculating the expected date of delivery, and the rule was later given publicity by Franz Naegele (Naegele 1812) to whom it is named after today. - Table of Contents: Inger Øakland's 2012 NTNU dr.philos. Thesis (p. 13)
Introduction
Antecedent theories on pregnancy length and time of delivery
Aristotle (384–322 BC)
William Harvey (1578–1657)
Hermanni Boerhaave (1668–1738)
Franz Carl Nägele (1778–1851) - Introduction: Inger Øakland's 2012 NTNU dr.philos. Thesis
Aristotle (384–322 BC) The ancient Greek philosopher (Figure 1), considered a pioneer of the field of logic, formulated theories on the duration of gestation in different animals; he reasoned that there was a specific term that varied between animal species according to the size and life expectancy of the animal (Harvey 1847). However, he wrote, ‘the human fetus is expelled both in the 7th and 10th month, and at any period of pregnancy between these; moreover, when the birth takes place in the 8th month it is possible for the infant to live’ (Harvey 1847). (p. 13)
Harvey wrote that ‘women are most prone to conceive either just before or just after the menstrual flux, for at these periods there is a greater degree of heat and moisture’ (Harvey 1847). (p. 13)
Nevertheless, this suggested rule of Boerhaave is the first known presentation of an algorithm for calculating the date of delivery. (p. 15)
Nägele, the professor in obstetrics at the University of Heidelberg (Figure 5) first published a method for calculating date of delivery 200 years ago (Nägele 1812), later known as Nägele's rule. (p. 15)