About these ads

Retraction Watch

Tracking retractions as a window into the scientific process

Duplication leads to retraction of 1997 paper on heart disease genes

with 7 comments

crit rev clin lab sciA top cardiology researcher, Robert Hegele, of the Robarts Research Institute at the University of Western Ontario, has retracted a 15-year-old review after editors were made aware that it was “very similar” to another of his reviews.

Here’s the December 2012 notice for the paper, which has been cited 23 times, according to Thomson Scientific’s Web of Knowledge:

The Publisher would like to inform the readers that the following review article has been withdrawn:RA Hegele. Candidate genes, small effects, and the prediction of atherosclerosis. Crit Rev Clin Lab Sci. 1997 Aug;34(4):343–67.

It was highlighted to the Editors that the content of this article was very similar to a previously published review article: RA Hegele. The genetic basis of atherosclerosis. Int J Clin Lab Res. 1997;27(1):2–13, which was confirmed upon further investigation.

The author has been fully co-operative with the investigation and agrees with the Editors and Publisher on this course of action to correct the redundancy in the literature record.

Hegele, who was at the University of Toronto when the paper was published, had funding from the Heart and Stroke Foundation of Ontario and the Medical Research Council (now the CIHR). He tells Retraction Watch that the journal alerted him to the duplicated text, but he does not know how it came to their attention. It seems likely that the editors were tipped off by a November 2011 email from the pseudonymous Clare Francis.

About these ads

Written by Ivan Oransky

January 18, 2013 at 8:56 am

7 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. “He tells Retraction Watch that the journal alerted him to the duplicated text”. It is probably semantics but can you be alerted to something you already know?


    January 18, 2013 at 10:10 am

  2. Clare Francis strikes again. Well done!


    January 18, 2013 at 3:52 pm

    • The whistleblower – Is Clare her real name or is she anonymous?


      January 18, 2013 at 4:20 pm

      • It’s an anagram of the real name, probably. People cannot resist the temptation to do that.

        Average PI

        January 18, 2013 at 4:33 pm

        • Do you know of anyone who has used the anagram fo their real name to report scientific fraud?


          January 18, 2013 at 4:41 pm

          • I think the SF guy did.

            Average PI

            January 18, 2013 at 6:02 pm

  3. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-20796615

    “There are all kinds of reasons for wanting to be anonymous, and they started thousands of years before humankind even imagined blogs and the internet.”

    fernando pessoa

    January 22, 2013 at 4:22 am

We welcome comments. Please read our comments policy at http://retractionwatch.wordpress.com/the-retraction-watch-faq/ and leave your comment below.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 35,570 other followers

%d bloggers like this: