Retraction Watch

Tracking retractions as a window into the scientific process

Tomato, tomahto—let’s call the oral health thing off

without comments

The journal Gerodontology  has retracted a paper for overbite, er overlap.

The article, “Translation and validation of the Hindi version of the Geriatric Oral Health Assessment Index,” was first published in January of this year by Saee P. Deshmukh and Usha M. Radke, of the department of prosthodontics at VSPM’s Dental College and Hospital, in Nagpur, India.

According to the retraction notice:

The following article from Gerodontology, ‘Translation and validation of the Hindi version of the Geriatric Oral Health Assessment Index‘, by Saee Prasad Deshmukh and Usha M. Radke, published online on 9 January 2012 in Wiley Online Library (www.onlinelibrary.wiley.com), and in Volume 29, No. 2 (June 2012), pp. e1052–e1058, has been retracted by agreement between the authors, the journal Editor in Chief, Michael MacEntee, and John Wiley & Sons A/S. The retraction has been agreed due to substantial overlap between this paper and ‘Translation and validation of the Arabic version of the Geriatric Oral Health Assessment Index (GOHAI)‘ by Daradkeh S & Khader YS, Journal of Oral Science, Volume 50, No. 4, pp. 453–459 (2008).

Here’s the abstract of the retracted article:

PURPOSE:To translate the original English version of the Geriatric Oral Health Assessment Index (GOHAI) into Hindi and assess its validity and reliability for use among people in India.

MATERIALS AND METHOD:

After translation into Hindi, a total of 385 participants aged 55+ demonstrated acceptable validity and reliability when used for people in India. Individual GOHAI items were recorded and summed as originally recommended. The questionnaire sought information about socio-demographic characteristics and self-reported perception of general and oral health. Clinical examination included assessment of periodontal status and number of decayed teeth, missing teeth, filled teeth and crowned teeth.

RESULT:

Mean GOHAI score was 40.9 (SD, 10.6; range, 12-60). Cronbach’s alpha for the GOHAI score was 0.88, indicating a high degree of internal consistency and homogeneity between the GOHAI items. The test-retest correlation coefficient for add-GOHAI scores was 0.72, indicating good stability. Add-GOHAI scores increased with poorer perceived general and oral health. Convergent validity, construct validity and discriminant validity of the GOHAI were demonstrated.

CONCLUSION:

It could therefore be used as a valuable instrument for measuring oral health-related quality of life for people in this region.

And, the abstract of the previous paper:

Our aim was to translate the original English version of the Geriatric Oral Health Assessment Index (GOHAI) into Arabic and assess its validity and reliability for use among people in North Jordan. After translation into Arabic and back-translation to check the translation quality, a total of 288 participants completed the Arabic version of the GOHAI questionnaire. Individual GOHAI items were recoded and summed as originally recommended. The questionnaire sought information about socio-demographic characteristics and self-reported perception of general and oral health. Clinical examination included assessment of periodontal status, and number of decayed teeth, missing teeth, filled teeth and crowned teeth. Reliability, internal consistency, and concurrent, convergent and discriminant validity of GOHAI scores were examined. Mean GOHAI score was 40.9 (SD = 10.6, range: 12 to 60). Cronbach’s alpha for the GOHAI score was 0.88, indicating a high degree of internal consistency and homogeneity between the GOHAI items. The test-retest correlation coefficient for add-GOHAI scores was 0.72, indicating good stability. Add-GOHAI scores increased with poorer perceived general and oral health. Convergent validity, construct validity and discriminant validity of the GOHAI were demonstrated. The Arabic translation of the GOHAI demonstrated acceptable validity and reliability when used for people in North Jordan. It could therefore be used as a valuable instrument for measuring oral health-related quality of life for people in this region.

Who knew the dental needs of Indians and North Jordanians were so similar?

Written by amarcus41

October 18th, 2012 at 8:30 am

Comments
  • JudyH October 18, 2012 at 9:30 am

    The journal’s characterization of this as “substantial overlap” makes it sound like a case of duplicate publication by the same authors or plagiarism by other authors. But it looks more like a case of inventing the data instead of going to the trouble of doing the actual research. This would be an example of one of the real dangers of scientific misconduct, in that it’s not just the publication statistics and promotions of a few people that are at issue. Had this not been detected, it would have gone into the database as a fact discovered in a Jordanian study independent of the Indian study, with the potential for causing faulty understanding and contributing to incorrect actions.

  • prof prem raj pushpakaran January 28, 2013 at 11:11 pm

    Usha M. Radke and the group need thorough training in professional ethics and they are answerable to the society for their misconduct.

    prof prem raj pushpakaran
    http://www.incredb.org/investigator.php?incredb_id=373

  • Rajath December 15, 2013 at 7:07 am

    When i first read the article for Hindi version, i was shocked to see the amount of similarities between this article and the original article. it was so obviously plagiarized that i wondered what the authors were thinking when they decided to publish it. i am positively satisfied to have reported this article to the journal just so that people dont start forming a negative image of research in India.

  • Post a comment

    Threaded commenting powered by interconnect/it code.