Abstract
Objective:This study examines the extent to which retracted articles pertaining to COVID-19 have been shared via social and mass media based on altmetric scores.Methods:Seventy-one retracted articles related to COVID-19 were identified from relevant databases, of which thirty-nine had an Altmetric Attention Score obtained using the Altmetrics Bookmarklet. Data extracted from the articles include overall attention score and demographics of sharers (e.g., geographic location, professional affiliation).Results:Retracted articles related to COVID-19 were shared tens of thousands of times to an audience of potentially hundreds of millions of readers and followers. Twitter was the largest medium for sharing these articles, and the United States was the country with the most sharers. While general members of the public were the largest proportion of sharers, researchers and professionals were not immune to sharing these articles on social media and on websites, blogs, or news media.Conclusions:These findings have potential implications for better understanding the spread of misleading or false information perpetuated in retracted scholarly publications. They emphasize the importance of quality peer review and research ethics among journals and responsibility among individuals who wish to share research findings.
Highlights
The COVID-19 pandemic remains a serious health concern worldwide despite vaccine development
Given the potentially dangerous impact of retracted COVID-19 articles on disease prevention and intervention and the unique role of social media and other articlesharing platforms in this era, this study aims to expand on a prior study by Cortegiani et al [13] to provide insight into the current state of retracted COVID-19 articles through an altmetrics lens
While Cortegiani et al.’s study focused on social media coverage of retracted articles in general, we focus on altmetrics for retracted COVID-19 articles
Summary
The COVID-19 pandemic remains a serious health concern worldwide despite vaccine development. This emergency situation resulted in a vast body of literature related to the pandemic. Universal hurry related to the production of scholarship on the pandemic has increased the speed of scientific productivity and researchers’ inaccuracy and has accelerated the review process, inviting a greater likelihood of research misbehavior [2]. The rapid growth of COVID-19 literature has led to a major, unfortunate outcome; the ratio of retracted articles is much greater, compared historically, than that for other research topics [1]. Scientific misconduct plays a prominent role in the retraction of articles from the biomedical literature [3]. Scientific misconduct is “fabrication, falsification or plagiarism in proposing, performing or reviewing research or in reporting research results” according to the jmla.mlanet.org (1) January 2022
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
