Clinical Endoscopy retracts sedation paper, creates neologism in process
Clinical Endoscopy, the official journal of the Korean Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, has retracted a 2011 paper on sedation practices.
Although the retraction statement is underpowered for information, it has a charming neologism. To wit, the announcement for the paper, “Comparison of midazolam alone versus midazolam plus propofol during endoscopic submucosal dissection,” is a “noticement.”
Unfortunately, that’s about all that’s interesting about this retraction. Or rather, that’s the only thing on which we can comment, given the notice itself:
The article published at Clinical Endoscopy Vol. 44 No. 1, was withdrawn after request from authors. The pdf file will be removed from journal homepage with the noticement “withdrawn by authors”.
In fact, the “noticement” doesn’t even say that much. But that’s not how retractions are supposed to work. The article should remain available with a watermark across the pages for all to see. Simply wishing it out of the literature defeats the purpose of the process.
We reached the corresponding author, Seon Mee Park, by email, who told us:
We retract the article because of authorship conflict.
We were hoping for a bit more information but have not received a reply.