Retraction Watch

Tracking retractions as a window into the scientific process

Weekend reads: FDA nominee authorship questions; low economics replication rates

with 8 comments

booksThe week at Retraction Watch featured a mysterious retraction from PLOS ONE, and a thoughtful piece by a scientist we’ve covered frequently on where we went wrong in that coverage. Here’s what was happening elsewhere:

Like Retraction Watch? Consider making a tax-deductible contribution to support our growth. You can also follow us on Twitter, like us on Facebook, add us to your RSS reader, and sign up on our homepage for an email every time there’s a new post. Click here to review our Comments Policy.

Written by Ivan Oransky

October 10th, 2015 at 9:30 am

Posted in weekend reads

Comments
  • Steen October 10, 2015 at 11:53 am

    No link for new piece by Ioannidis et al. on METRICS.Stanford.edu?
    http://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.1002264

    • Ivan Oransky October 10, 2015 at 4:59 pm

      Hadn’t seen that, thanks!

  • JustMy2Cents October 10, 2015 at 2:43 pm

    Link to Nader’s article is broken, is this it?

    (http://ecowatch.com/2015/10/05/ralph-nader-monsanto-foia/)

  • Jaime A. Teixeira da Silva October 10, 2015 at 9:08 pm

    I have posed an open question to the scientific public at ResearchGate:
    When should scientists be banned by journals and publishers?
    https://www.researchgate.net/post/When_should_scientists_be_banned_by_journals_and_publishers
    Since only registered users can respond at ResearchGate, I am leaving the same question hare at RW, to allow anonymous commentators also the opportunity to weigh in on this.

  • CarolynS October 11, 2015 at 9:09 pm

    Regarding Califf, as far as I know most if not all federal agencies exercise quite a bit of control over what can be published over their employees’ names, even if the employee in question had done the research or taken a lead role in writing the commentary. Yes, the employee may be an ‘author’ from the outside point of view, but nonetheless the agency can simply require the person to not have his or her name on the final product and can require changes.

  • Anonymous October 14, 2015 at 12:40 am

    Comments made about papers published in Springer journals were linked to PubPeer through an Altmetric link (social cites) on the top page of each article. Those links no longer exist. Why is that?

    • Anonymous October 22, 2015 at 9:35 am

      I am pleased to note (and extremely relieved) that 10 days after making my query, that the article metrics are back online for all Springer papers, including links to their respective PubPeer pages.

  • Post a comment

    Threaded commenting powered by interconnect/it code.