Retraction Watch

Tracking retractions as a window into the scientific process

Archive for the ‘neurosurgery (journal)’ Category

NFL and NYT collide: Did studies on concussion rates leave out necessary data?

without comments

National Football LeagueThe National Football League failed to include data from diagnosed concussions in peer-reviewed studies, making the sport look safer than it is, allege the results of an investigation published yesterday in the New York Times. Now, the paper and the NFL are arguing over whether the studies were supposed to include every instance of head injury.

Early studies on concussion rates published in the journal Neurosurgery left out at least 100 instances of of concussions, the Times reported. The Times and the NFL disagree on the implications of studies based on an incomplete data set: Sources told the Times that it’s bad science, while the NFL explains that the studies were “necessarily preliminary.”

Yesterday afternoon, the sports league published a statement saying that the Times story “is contradicted by clear facts” and “sensationalized.” The statement argued that:  Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Shannon Palus

March 25th, 2016 at 1:00 pm

They wuz robbed: Editorial TKO for boxing paper leads to retraction, republication

without comments

In the blue corner: California researchers who reviewed trends in death rates among professional boxers.

In the red (ink) corner: The editors of Neurosurgery, who misclassified the article, leading to an abbreviated version appearing in print.

The decision: A retraction, followed by a reclassification and republication of the complete article: Read the rest of this entry »

Written by amarcus41

October 25th, 2010 at 9:30 am