Analysis of retracted articles in the surgical literature

Abstract

BackgroundRetractions of scientific articles represent attempts to correct the literature. Our goal was to examine retracted surgical papers. MethodsNCBI PubMed database was queried using the search terms “surgery,” “surg,” or “surgical” and “retracted” or “retraction.” Article details were recorded. ResultsThere were 184 retracted surgical articles identified from 1991 through 2015. Average retraction time was 3.6 years. General (26%), Cardiac (22%), and Orthopedic (10%) surgery were most common. Reasons for retraction were duplication (35.3%), Institutional Review Board violations (18.5%), falsified data (14.7%), data errors (9.8%), author dispute (8.2%), plagiarism (7.6%), copyright violations (2.2%), financial disclosure violations (0.5%), and consent (0.5%). No reason for retraction was given in 8.7% of cases. Median IF was higher for administrative than content-related retraction reasons (3.0 vs. 2.0, P < 0.01). A paywall, requiring a subscription to read, restricted access to 23.4% of retraction notices. ConclusionsArticle retractions occur across all fields of surgery for various reasons, both administrative and content-related. The majority of surgical retraction notices have a reason for retraction listed and do not require payment to read.