Retraction Of Article Research Articles

Reasons for retraction of clinical research articles in PubMed indexed medical journals from 2012 to 2022

Background: Misconduct in the publication of research articles is a serious concern for the scientific community. This study was conducted with the objective to assess various reasons for retraction of clinical research articles published in PubMed indexed journals from all over the world since 2012 to 2022. Methods: A search was performed on the PubMed database for retracted research articles using filters for “retracted publication”. A total of 314 eligible research articles were assessed for studying basic details. The study outcome measures were to evaluate the reasons for the retraction and authors’ and journal editors’ responses to retractions. Results: Of the original research articles retracted, 150/242 (61.98%) were clinical trial publications. Of the total 314 retracted research articles, the most retractions were in 2014 (47, 14.96%) and 2013 (40, 12.73%) while the fewest retractions were in 2012 (3, 0.95%) and 2022 (9, 2.86%). The most common reasons for retraction were data errors or data analysis errors (120/314, 38.21%) followed by plagiarism (37/314, 11.8%), duplicate publication (35/314, 11.1%), ethical concerns (23/314, 7.3%) and methodological flaws (22/314, 7%). These concerns were raised mainly by the editor or editor-in-chief (228/314, 72.61%), followed by authors (29/314, 9.23%). Out of 228 editorial concerns on publications, authors of only 91/228 (39.91%) agreed and 17/228 (7.45%) completely disagreed with the editorial decision. Conclusion: Authors need to be more careful about data analysis errors, fabricated or falsified data, and plagiarism while submitting their research papers. On the part of editors, detecting misconduct at the submission and peer review stages will help lower the retraction rate and avoid citation of such articles by other authors.

Unearthing the misconduct and inaccuracies in social science research: a trend analysis of retracted articles based on retraction watch database

Purpose The purpose of this study is to comprehensively analyze the research article retractions in social sciences over the past decade (2014–2023). Design/methodology/approach The study used scientometric methods to evaluate the prevalence, patterns and factors contributing to social sciences article retractions. Bibliographic data of retracted articles were collected from the Retraction Watch Database under an agreement signed with the database. Further, citations of the retracted articles were collected from Scopus and Google Scholar. The analysis encompasses performance assessment and citation-based analysis to reveal the trend of retraction and scrutinize the impact of retracted articles. Findings Over the past decade, article retractions have shown dynamic trends, with notable fluctuations in recent years. Further, investigating the time taken for article retraction reveals the urgency of addressing issues identified soon after publication. Scientific misconduct and publication-related concerns emerge as primary factors leading to retractions. Countries such as Russia, the USA, China and publishers such as Elsevier and Taylor and Francis led in the retractions of social science articles. A significant portion of retracted works had garnered academic attention prior to retraction and even after retraction. Originality/value This study can contribute to a better understanding among scholars and stakeholders of the trends and reasons for retractions of research articles in the social sciences.

What Can We Learn from the Retraction of Medical Articles

What Can We Learn from the Retraction of Medical Articles

Tai Y-T, Fulciniti M, Hideshima T, Song W, Leiba M, Li X-F, Rumizen M, Burger P, Morrison A, Podar K, Chauhan D, Tassone P, Richardson P, Munshi NC, Ghobrial IM, Anderson KC. Targeting MEK induces myeloma-cell cytotoxicity and inhibits osteoclastogenesis. Blood. 2007;110(5):1656-1663.

This article has been retracted; please see Elsevier's Article Correction, Retraction and Removal Policy (Article withdrawal | Elsevier policy).This article has been retracted at the request of the Editors and authors.Within the paper, image issues were identified in Figures1, 4, and 6. Images within these figures show duplication, modification, or unmarked splices.The authors state that these figures cannot be used to support the conclusions of the paper.Authors Tai, Fulciniti, Song, Li, Morrison, Chauhan, Tassone, Ghobrial, and Anderson approve the retraction. Authors Hideshima, Leiba, Rumizen, Burger, Podar, Richardson, and Munshi did not respond.

Article retraction

Article retraction

‘Special issue-ization’ as a growth and revenue strategy: Reproduction by the “big five” and the risks for research integrity

ABSTRACT The exponential growth of MDPI and Frontiers over the last decade has been powered by their extensive use of special issues. The “special issue-ization” of journal publishing has been particularly associated with new publishers and seen as potentially “questionable.” Through an extended case-study analysis of three journals owned by one of the “big five” commercial publishers, this paper explores the risks that this growing use of special issues presents to research integrity. All three case-study journals show sudden and marked changes in their publication patterns. An analysis of special issue editorials and retraction notes was used to determine the specifics of special issues and reasons for retractions. Descriptive statistics were used to analyse data. Findings suggest that these commercial publishers are also promoting special issues and that article retractions are often connected to guest editor manipulation. This underlies the threat that “special issue-ization” presents to research integrity. It highlights the risks posed by the guest editor model, and the importance of extending this analysis to long-existing commercial publishers. The paper emphasizes the need for an in-depth examination of the underlying structures and political economy of science, and a discussion of the rise of gaming and manipulation within higher education systems.

Analysis of the Types of Retracted COVID-19 Articles Published in PubMed-Listed Journals.

Periodically, medical publications are retracted. The reasons vary from minor situations, such as author attributions, which do not undermine the validity of the data or the analysis in the article, to serious reasons, such as fraud. Understanding the reasons for retraction can provide important information for clinicians, educators, researchers, journals, and editorial boards. The PubMed database was searched using the term "COVID-19" (coronavirus disease 2019) and the term limitation "retracted publication." The characteristics of the journals with retracted articles, the types of article, and the reasons for retraction were analyzed. This search recovered 196 articles that had been retracted. These retractions were published in 179 different journals; 14 journals had >1 retracted article. The mean impact factor of these journals was 8.4, with a range of 0.32-168.9. The most frequent reasons for retractions were duplicate publication, concerns about data validity and analysis, concerns about peer review, author request, and the lack of permission or ethical violation. There were significant differences between the types of article and the reasons for retraction but no consistent pattern. A more detailed analysis of two particular retractions demonstrates the complexity and the effort required to make decisions about article retractions. The retraction of published articles presents a significant challenge to journals, editorial boards, peer reviewers, and authors. This process has the potential to provide important benefits; it also has the potential to undermine confidence in both research and the editorial process.

Exploring the landscape of academic retractions in medicine: a comprehensive umbrella review.

The escalating trend of academic article retractions over the last decades raises concerns about scientific integrity, but heterogeneity in retractions and reasons for them pose a major challenge. We aimed to comprehensively overview systematic reviews focusing on retractions in the biomedical literature. We abstracted salient features and bibliometric details from shortlisted articles. The Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Checklist for Systematic Reviews and Research Syntheses was used for validity appraisal. A total of 11 reviews were included, published between 2016 and 2023, and reporting on a total of 1851 retracted studies. Several major reasons for retractions were identified, spanning both misconduct (e.g., falsification, duplication, plagiarism) and non-misconduct issues (e.g., unreliable data, publishing problems). Correlates include author-related factors (number of authors, nationality) and journal-related factors (impact factor), with repeat offenders contributing significantly. Impacts of retractions is profound, affecting scholarly credibility, public trust, and resource utilization. In order to prevent retractions and amend their adverse effects, rigorous and transparent reporting standards, enhanced training in research ethics, strengthened peer review processes, and the establishment of collaborative and integrated research integrity offices are proposed.

Article Retraction: A Tool to Deal with Information Pollution

Article Retraction: A Tool to Deal with Information Pollution

Recent trends: Retractions of articles in the oncology field

BackgroundIn recent years, there has been a surge in media reports on articles being retracted after publication. This issue has gained significant attention, particularly due to the consecutive large-scale retractions carried out by renowned international publishers, which have aroused widespread concern in the society. ObjectiveTo analyze the data of retracted articles and retraction trends. MethodsThe publications were searched through Web of Science Core Collection (WoSCC) database and imported into CiteSpace in plain text format, and visual analysis of countries, institutions, keywords, and subject areas were performed to reveal the trends of retracted articles and the worst areas of retraction. ResultsFrom 1990 to 2022, 21,568 retracted articles were retrieved, among which the number of retracted articles increased year by year. China is the country with the highest number of retracted articles; Islamic Azad University is the institution with the highest number of retracted articles. In the analysis of all retracted articles across different subject areas, the number of retracted articles in the field of oncology was the highest; In the keyword cluster analysis of retracted articles within the field of oncology, the most prominent category of retracted articles were related to pancreatic cancer. ConclusionsScientific and systematic analysis of retracted articles is conducive to improving the quality of papers, raising the level of human research, and cleaning up the research environment.

Description and analysis of the characteristics of retracted articles addressing public health emergencies: A study investigating COVID-19 articles

The present study analyzed the main characteristics of retracted articles addressing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) published in medical journals in China and abroad. The results are anticipated to provide a reference for the publication and dissemination of articles addressing public health emergencies in the future. Information regarding the retraction of COVID-19 articles was obtained from the Retraction Watch website for the period between January 1, 2020, and October 31, 2023. The main characteristics of the withdrawn COVID-19 articles were analyzed according to the distribution of journals, authors, publication period, and the reasons for retraction. Among the 235 COVID-19 articles withdrawn, the main article types were original research and reviews, the main publishers were journals without impact factors and/or preprint platforms, and the authors' countries were mostly China and the United States. The publication period was mainly in 2020 and 2021, and the number of publications is gradually decreasing. The retraction delay was 0–741 days, with a mean delay of 5.9 months. In addition to mistakes from journals/publishers, most of the top reasons for retraction included academic misconduct, especially regarding data and results. The main characteristics of retracted COVID-19 articles included publication on preprint platforms and journals with an impact factor < 5. Furthermore, more retractions were due to journal/publisher errors and academic misconduct. During epidemic situations, such as COVID-19, medical journals should not only improve publishing efficiency, but also strive to strictly control academic quality.

Evaluation of retracted articles in the field of emergency medicine on the web of science database

BackgroundThe retraction of articles stands as the most significant mechanism employed to uphold the integrity of science, particularly in flawed studies. ObjectivesThis study aims to explore the reasons for article retractions in the field of emergency medicine and elucidate the problems arising from such retractions. The goal is to identify parameters in retracted articles that compromise scientific knowledge and raise awareness. Material and methodsRetracted articles within the emergency medicine category were analyzed and assessed using the Web of Science database. The study sought to address the following questions: 1. In which year or years were the most articles retracted? 2. In which journals were the retracted articles published? 3. What is the distribution of topics in retracted articles? 4. What are the reasons for the retraction of articles? 5. What is the time difference and citation count between the publication and retraction years of the articles? ResultsThe study delved into reasons for article retractions, types of retracted articles, and other relevant factors. A total of 61 retracted articles were examined and analyzed, revealing an increasing trend in the rate of article retractions over the years. The majority of retracted articles occurred in 2023, with the highest retraction rate identified in the “Emergency Medicine International” journal. On average, articles were retracted 356 days after publication. Reasons for retracted articles included concerns related to data, authorship issues, plagiarism, duplication, and biased or fraudulent peer review. ConclusionsThis study provided an examination of retracted articles in the field of emergency medicine, highlighting a noteworthy increase in retractions due to various reasons. Despite retractions, it was observed that the citation counts of retracted articles increased. The growing number of retracted articles and frequent citations pose potential dangers from a scientific perspective, as citing retracted articles damages scientific integrity. The study underscores the importance of understanding the reasons for retracted articles and preventing the spread of such incidents in emergency medicine literature. The results, analyzed within various variables, indicate the need for further research and solutions, guiding future research efforts and contributing to the literature.

An analysis of retracted COVID-19 articles published by one medical publisher with multiple journals

Background The retraction of medical articles periodically occurs in most medical journals and can involve multiple article types. These retractions are beneficial if they remove flawed or fraudulent information from the medical literature. However, retractions may also decrease confidence in the medical literature and require significant amounts of time by editors. Methods One publisher (Hindawi) announced that it will retract over 1200 articles. Given this, the PubMed database was searched to identify retracted publications on or related to COVID-19, and articles retracted by journals sponsored by the publisher Hindawi were then identified. Results These journals retracted 25 articles and, in most cases, did not provide an exact explanation about the particular problem(s) resulting in the retraction. The time to retraction was 468.7 ± 109.8 days (median = 446 days). These articles had 9.3 ± 9.9 citations. Conclusion Analysis of the titles and abstracts of the articles suggests that their removal from the medical literature would have limited effects on the near-term management decisions during the COVID-19 pandemic. Nevertheless, retraction of medical articles creates uncertainty in medical care and science and in the public regarding the validity of medical research and related publications and the level of professionalism of the individuals submitting these articles.

Retraction of health science articles by researchers in Latin America and the Caribbean: A scoping review.

We aimed to conduct a scoping review to assess the profile of retracted health sciences articles authored by individuals affiliated with academic institutions in Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC). We systematically searched seven databases (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Embase, Medline/Ovid, Scielo, and LILACS). We included articles published in peer-reviewed journals between 2003 and 2022 that had at least one author with an institutional affiliation in LAC. Data were collected on the year of publication, study design, authors' countries of origin, number of authors, subject matter of the manuscript, scientific journals of publication, retraction characteristics, and reasons for retraction. We included 147 articles, the majority being observational studies (41.5%). The LAC countries with the highest number of retractions were Brazil (n = 69), Colombia (n = 16), and Mexico (n = 15). The areas of study with the highest number of retractions were infectology (n = 21) and basic sciences (n = 15). A retraction label was applied to 89.1% of the articles, 70.7% were retracted by journal editors, and 89.1% followed international retraction guidelines. The primary reasons for retraction included errors in procedures or data collection (n = 39), inconsistency in results or conclusions (n = 37), plagiarism (n = 21), and suspected scientific fraud (n = 19). In conclusion, most retractions of scientific publications in health sciences in LAC adhered to international guidelines and were linked to methodological issues in execution and scientific misconduct. Efforts should be directed toward ensuring the integrity of scientific research in the field of health.

Retraction of article: Depth distribution law of polarization characteristics of vector acoustic field in shallow sea

Retraction of article: Depth distribution law of polarization characteristics of vector acoustic field in shallow sea

RETRACTION: Retraction of the Original Articles.

[This retracts the article on p. 404 in vol. 66.][This retracts the article on p. 458 in vol. 67.][This retracts the article on p. 375 in vol. 70.].

Анализ базы данных Retraction Watch по ретрагированным медицинским статьям из Казахстана

Introduction. Nowadays, the scientific community attaches excellent interest to the quality of scientific publications. Published papers containing inaccuracies and errors are subjected to the retraction procedure, which is essential to ensure the integrity and ethics of publications, revealing irregularities such as fabrication, falsification, conflicts of interest and plagiarism. This study aims to analyse retracted articles in medicine and public health from Kazakhstan to identify the causes of retraction and draw the scientific community's attention to improve the quality of scientific publications. Methods. In this study, the authors searched the Retraction Watch database with up-to-date information as of 18 January 2024. They found 129 retracted articles from Kazakhstan, among which 13 were related to medicine and public health. Inclusion criteria were retracted articles from Kazakhstan in the categories "Medicine" and "Public Health", excluding articles not from Kazakhstan or not related to these categories. Results. The search results showed that of the 13 retracted articles, eight were related to medical topics, and five were in the field of public health and safety. Reasons for retraction were highlighted, such as data concerns, journal investigations, lack of ethical approval, duplicate articles, fake peer review, and plagiarism. Additional analysis showed that half of the retracted articles resulted from joint work between Kazakhstani and Russian authors. Research articles were most often retracted, and the interval between publication and retraction ranged from 6 to 54 months. Conclusion. The discussion of the results emphasises the importance of adhering to ethical standards in medical research. Retraction of articles plays a crucial role in maintaining the quality and reliability of scientific publications, emphasising the need for accuracy in conducting and publishing research in the field.

Profiling Article Retractions in Accounting and Finance Research

Profiling Article Retractions in Accounting and Finance Research

Assessing the Online Scientific Community’s Support for Various Reasons for Article Retraction: A Preliminary Survey

A prevailing lay understanding of retraction in the scientific literature is to correct for misconduct and honest errors. Nonetheless, though historically rare, retractions to limit the spread of results deemed socially harmful (i.e., information hazards), have gained increasing traction and become increasingly common. This study sought primarily to determine the extent to which information hazard-based retraction is supported in the scientific community and as a secondary goal whether individual difference variables moderate receptivity. We tasked a diverse sample of researchers across various disciplines who use social media to evaluate scenarios in which a paper was retracted for misconduct, honest errors, and information hazards. Overall, support for retraction on the basis of information hazards was low, suggesting that researchers overwhelmingly support academic freedom as a concept. Nonetheless, left-leaning ideologies predicted slightly greater defensibility of the practice among individuals early in their careers. We provide training suggestions to mitigate reactance toward controversial scientific findings.

An examination of retracted articles in nursing literature.

The output of scholarly publications in scientific literature has increased exponentially in recent years. This increase in literature has been accompanied by an increase in retractions. Although some of these may be attributed to publishing errors, many are the result of unsavory research practices. The purposes of this study were to identify the number of retracted articles in nursing and reasons for the retractions, analyze the retraction notices, and determine the length of time for an article in nursing to be retracted. This was an exploratory study. A search of PubMed/MEDLINE, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and Retraction Watch databases was conducted to identify retracted articles in nursing and their retraction notices. Between 1997 and 2022, 123 articles published in the nursing literature were retracted. Ten different reasons for retraction were used to categorize these articles with one-third of the retractions (n = 37, 30.1%) not specifying a reason. Sixty-eight percent (n = 77) were retracted because of an actual or a potential ethical concern: duplicate publication, data issues, plagiarism, authorship issues, and copyright. Nurses rely on nursing-specific scholarly literature as evidence for clinical decisions. The findings demonstrated that retractions are increasing within published nursing literature. In addition, it was evident that retraction notices do not prevent previously published work from being cited. This study addressed a gap in knowledge about article retractions specific to nursing.