About these ads

Retraction Watch

Tracking retractions as a window into the scientific process

Archive for the ‘korea retractions’ Category

Heart study retracted because it was submitted without permission of most of the authors

with 3 comments

clincardcoverA group of authors in South Korea has lost their 2012 paper in Clinical Cardiology because, well, they weren’t a group after all.

The paper, “Correlation of Electrocardiographic Changes and Myocardial Fibrosis in Patients With Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy Detected by Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging,” came from corresponding author of Konkuk University School of Medicine in Seoul, and a half-dozen colleagues. At least, that’s what the manuscript said.

But according to the retraction notice, Yang had nothing to do with the paper — nor did five other co-authors. Read the rest of this entry »

About these ads

“Critical data” errors force retraction of vision paper

leave a comment »

jjophthalA group of authors in Korea has lost their 2013 paper on treating vision loss after one of the two cases they’d reported turned out to have been fatally flawed.

The paper, “Isolated central retinal artery occlusion as an initial presentation of paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuria and successful long-term prevention of systemic thrombosis with eculizumab,” had appeared in the Japanese Journal of Ophthalmology.

According to the abstract: Read the rest of this entry »

Written by amarcus41

March 7, 2014 at 9:30 am

Clone call for bird gene bar-coding paper

with 3 comments

molecules and cellsA group of bird researchers in Korea has lost their 2006 paper on DNA barcoding of that country’s avian species because they feathered the article with material from others.

The paper, “DNA barcoding Korean birds,” appeared in Molecules and Cells, published by Springer for the Korean Society for Molecular and Cellular Biology and has been cited 88 times, according to Thomson Scientific’s Web of Knowledge. According to the abstract: Read the rest of this entry »

Written by amarcus41

February 27, 2014 at 11:00 am

Fraud, retractions no barrier to US cloning patent for Woo-Suk Hwang

with 17 comments

science 2005Woo-Suk Hwang is having quite a comeback.

The cloning researcher’s fall from grace in 2005 and 2006 was covered worldwide, featuring two high-profile retractions from Science and convictions (now under appeal) on charges he embezzled government funds and broke South Korea’s bioethics law. But as Nature reported last month in a profile focusing on Hwang’s Biotech Research Foundation: Read the rest of this entry »

Written by ivanoransky

February 16, 2014 at 4:30 pm

This retraction stinks: Authors pull paper on pig gas

with 8 comments

ajasHere’s a stinky retraction.

The authors of a 2006 article in the Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences have yanked the paper — without an explanation.

The article, titled “Effectiveness of Lactobacillus plantarum strain KJ-10311 to remove characteristic Malodorous gases in piggery slurry,” came from J. D. Kim and K. M. Park. Kim appears to be a member of the journal’s editorial board, which perhaps explains why the authors were able to get away with this retraction notice: Read the rest of this entry »

Bone-headed move? Authors of cancer-skeleton paper copy from paper in same journal

leave a comment »

ImageClimacteric is retracting a 2013 article by a group of researchers in Seoul who used data from a paper by another duo of Korean scientists also published in, you guessed it, Climacteric.

The paper, “Different bone mineral density in cervical and endometrial cancer,” came from a group of  Soonchunhyang University and was published online late last year. It purported to look at the association between gynecologic cancers and bone mineral densityRead the rest of this entry »

Written by amarcus41

February 3, 2014 at 12:37 pm

Weekend reads: Fraudster calls himself a “foolish coward,” and COPE’s top cases

with 5 comments

booksHere’s some of what crossed our desks this week:

Written by ivanoransky

January 18, 2014 at 9:30 am

Chopping broccoli: Researchers lose paper on florets after readers raise questions

with 13 comments

b&mclWith apologies to Dana Carvey, Bioorganic & Medicinal Chemistry Letters has chopped a 2012 paper on the molecular constituents of broccoli florets after readers evidently were forced to do the job of reviewers and point out fatal flaws in the study.

The article, “Two novel bioactive glucosinolates from Broccoli (Brassica oleracea L. var. italica) florets,” came from a group in South Korea and has yet to be cited, according to Thomson Scientific’s Web of Knowledge. But according to the retraction notice, after publication critics pointed out serious problems with the work. To wit: Read the rest of this entry »

Pamela Ronald does the right thing again, retracting a Science paper

with 26 comments

Pamela Ronald, via UC Davis

Pamela Ronald, via UC Davis

About a month ago, we reported on a retraction by Pamela Ronald, of the University of California, Davis, and colleagues. We noted then that this was a case of scientists doing the right thing. Ronald contacted us after that post ran, and let us know that there would be another retraction shortly. That retraction notice has now appeared, in Science: Read the rest of this entry »

Sixth retraction appears for virtual reality researcher

with one comment

media economicsDong Hee Shin, who studies virtual reality and other technology and who has already retracted five papers, has had another retracted.

Here’s the notice in the Journal of Media Economics: Read the rest of this entry »

Written by ivanoransky

September 20, 2013 at 11:30 am

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 31,136 other followers