Retraction Watch

Tracking retractions as a window into the scientific process

Archive for the ‘faked data’ Category

“Conscious fabrication” leads to retraction of diabetes study

with one comment

diabetcoverDiabetologia has retracted a 2011 meeting abstract from a group in Sweden, indicating that the second author has been found guilty of research misconduct — a charge the scientist denies.

The abstract, “Reduced syntaxin-5 in skeletal muscle of patients with type 2 diabetes is linked to increased diacylglycerol, activation of PKCtheta and impaired insulin signalling,” was presented at the annual meeting of the European Association of the Study of Diabetes. The first author was Kurt Højlund, who now is at the University of Southern Denmark. The second author was Pontus Boström, of the Karolinska Institutet.

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

Fake citations plague some Google Scholar profiles

with 11 comments

lw20

One of the “articles” that was linked to Bucci’s Scholar profile last week (click for full-size)

Last week, microbiologist Enrico Bucci emailed us with concerns that several of the citations listed on his Google Scholar profile were fake.

Colleagues of his had noticed the same problem on their pages.

The listings seem to be real titles, researchers, and publications, but scrambled. When Bucci first spoke with us, the Scholar citations all linked to clearly fake pages on a site hosted by e-commerce giant Alibaba. You can see an example here (that’s a screenshot on the right). Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Cat Ferguson

November 17th, 2014 at 2:22 pm

Posted in faked data

Retraction appears for faked study of Novartis anti-cancer compound

with 6 comments

Raymond Sawaya, director of MD Anderson’s brain tumor program, presents Jun Fu with the 2014 Caroline Ross Endowment Fellowship.

Raymond Sawaya, director of MD Anderson’s brain tumor program, presents Jun Fu with the 2014 Caroline Ross Endowment Fellowship.

A paper by a former postdoc at MD Anderson Cancer Center who “admitted to knowingly and intentionally falsifying” a figure has been retracted.

In August, the Office of Research Integrity announced that it had sanctioned Jun Fu for faking data in a study of the results of a mouse study of NVP-HSP990, a Novartis compound designed to fight brain tumors. Here’s the notice for the study in question, published in Cancer Research:
Read the rest of this entry »

Will journal finally retract fraudulent paper 10 months after an official request?

with one comment

ChemosphereElsevier journal Chemosphere may finally retract a paper it learned contained fabricated data in January when a member of the author’s institution requested the paper be retracted.

The paper has been cited at least once since the lies came to light, as we reported earlier this month.

The journal contacted the relevant parties on October 29 with the following email about “Degradation of 2,4-dinitroanisole (DNAN) by metabolic cooperative activity of Pseudomonas sp. strain FK357andRhodococcus imtechensis strain RKJ300,” although no notice has been posted: Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Cat Ferguson

October 30th, 2014 at 11:30 am

Boldt’s data were fake in 1996 paper

with 8 comments

Ludwigshafen Hospital, via Wikimedia http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Klinikum_Ludwigshafen_Nordseite.jpg

Ludwigshafen Hospital, via Wikimedia http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Klinikum_Ludwigshafen_Nordseite.jpg

Update, 4 p.m. EST, 10/29/14: As a commenter points out, we didn’t quite get this one right. The Boldt paper that has been retracted was not previously retracted for lack of IRB approval. Rather, it was a heretofore unretracted article, from 1996, which German investigators have determined contained faked data. We’ve made edits below using strikethroughs, and have changed the headline to better reflect the content. We apologize for the errors.

We’ve commented before on the fact that we’ve noticed there’s often more to retractions whose stated reason is lack of institutional review board (IRB) approval. We can understand editors’ inclination to act as quickly as possible to issue a retraction, the scientific publishing equivalent of jailing Al Capone for tax evasion. But we appreciate it even more when said editors return to the scene of the crime, as it were, when new important details come out.

Case in point: Anesthesia & Analgesia has amended its retraction of a 2009 1996 study by Joachim Boldt — who with nearly 90 retractions once held the record in that department — based on findings that the data in that paper were fabricated.

The article was titled “Cardiopulmonary bypass priming using a high dose of a balanced hydroxyethyl starch versus an albumin-based priming strategy,” “The effects of albumin versus hydroxyethyl starch solution on cardiorespiratory and circulatory variables in critically ill patient.”  had previously been retracted because Boldt had failed to obtain adequate ethics approval for the research. But now comes this, According to the retraction notice from editor in chief Steven Shafer: Read the rest of this entry »

Oops: Elsevier journal publishes paper citing paper it promised to retract two months ago

with 7 comments

elsevierJournal publishers can be agonizingly slow when it comes to officially retracting a paper.

Here’s a prime example of the consequences of that bureaucratic foot-dragging: Ten months after being told that Fazlurrahman Khan had fabricated his data, and two months after announcing two of Khan’s papers would be retracted from two of its journals, Elsevier still has not retracted either paper.

Worse, at least one of the papers, “Degradation of 2,4-dinitroanisole (DNAN) by metabolic cooperative activity of Pseudomonas sp. strain FK357 and Rhodococcus imtechensis strain RKJ300,” in the journal Chemosphere, has been cited since the announcement was made. In fact, the paper was published in Journal of Hazardous Materials, the Elsevier journal that is dragging its feet retracting another of Khan’s papers, “Aerobic degradation of 4-nitroaniline (4-NA) via novel degradation intermediates by Rhodococcus sp. strain FK48.”

Jim Spain, in whose lab Khan worked at Georgia Tech, reached out to us to express his concerns with this timeline: Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Cat Ferguson

October 3rd, 2014 at 9:30 am

Researcher who broke into lab up to nine retractions

with 2 comments

bichaw_v053i036.inddKarel Bezouška, a researcher who broke into a lab refrigerator to tamper with an investigation into his work, has nine retractions.

Here’s the retraction notice in Biochemistry for 2010’s “Cooperation between Subunits Is Essential for High-Affinity Binding of N-Acetyl-d-hexosamines to Dimeric Soluble and Dimeric Cellular Forms of Human CD69:” Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Ivan Oransky

September 22nd, 2014 at 9:30 am

Image manipulation forces retraction of hepatitis C paper

without comments

ljii20.v032.i04.coverA group of researchers from Egypt has lost their 2013 article on hepatitis C in the Journal of Immunoassay and Immunochemistry for fudging their figures.

The article was titled “In vitro neutralization of HCV by goat antibodies against peptides encompassing regions downstream of HVR-1 of E2 glycoprotein.” According to the abstract: Read the rest of this entry »

Wrong in the tooth: Faked data, authorship issues force retraction of dental paper

with one comment

cridCase Reports in Dentistry has pulled a 2014 article about an oral parasitic infection (caution: not pretty) after learning that the authors were not exactly honest about their work.

Here’s the abstract of the paper, “Rhinosporidiosis of the Parotid Duct”: Read the rest of this entry »

Written by amarcus41

September 12th, 2014 at 10:30 am

Retraction appears for psychiatrist sought for arrest in alleged fraud scheme

with 6 comments

malafosse

Alain Malafosse, via University of Geneva

Want bogus data, million-dollar fraud allegations and a scientist on the lam? We give you Alain Malafosse.

The British Journal of Psychiatry has retracted a June 2013 paper by Malafosse and his colleagues on the genetics of bipolar disorder in children because Malafosse allegedly fabricated key data in the study.

The article, “Childhood maltreatment and methylation of the glucocorticoid receptor gene NR3C1 in bipolar disorder,” purported to find that people with bipolar disorder who had experienced more, and more severe, abuse early in life were more likely to show epigenetic changes. According to the abstract:

Read the rest of this entry »

Written by amarcus41

September 4th, 2014 at 9:30 am