About these ads

Retraction Watch

Tracking retractions as a window into the scientific process

Archive for the ‘lack of IRB approval’ Category

Co-author of retracted conspiracy ideation-climate skepticism paper addresses apparent contradictions

with 86 comments

Lewandowsky

Lewandowsky

We — and others — have been scratching our heads about the real reasons for the formal retraction on March 21 of a Frontiers in Psychology paper since the journal issued a statement on the subject on Friday that seemed to contradict the retraction notice and that certainly differed from accounts on some blogs. Today, we learned a few more details about what happened in the year between when the paper was provisionally removed and then formally retracted from a post by Stephan Lewandowsky, one of the co-authors of the paper.

The March 21 statement, writes Lewandowsky, Read the rest of this entry »

About these ads

Journal that retracted conspiracy ideation-climate skepticism paper says it did not “cave into threats”

with 334 comments

frontiersFrontiers in Psychology, which last month formally retracted a controversial paper linking climate skepticism to conspiracy ideation, says it did not cave in to threats from skeptics, contrary to what a lot of news reports and commentary implied or claimed.

For example, summarizing a number of those reports this morning, before Frontiers had issued its statement, co-author Stephan Lewandowsky wrote on his blog:

By and large, the mainstream media coverage seems to have picked up on what’s really at issue here, namely academic freedom and editorial intimidation by a small band of vociferous individuals.

Here’s the statement, in which Frontiers stresses the rights of the people Lewandowsky and his colleagues wrote about:

Read the rest of this entry »

IRB mishap costs MD Anderson team a paper on prostate cancer

with 8 comments

bjuifeb14A group of researchers from MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston has lost a 2013 paper in BJU International for running afoul of their institution’s ethics review board, and of military reviewers, as well.

The paper, “Many young men with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screen-detected prostate cancers may be candidates for active surveillance,” looked at prostate cancer screening in men 55 and under — considered young for the older-man’s disease. According to the abstract: Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Adam Marcus

February 18, 2014 at 2:27 pm

Another retraction for former record holder Joachim Boldt

leave a comment »

bjaWith all the fuss about Yoshitaka Fujii, the current record holder for most retractions, you can be forgiven for forgetting that Joachim Boldt once owned that title, at least for about a year.

Well, Boldt has another retraction, although he’d need to double his tally (which is in the range of 90) to match Fujii’s “impressive” haul.

The new paper is, well, old, having been published in 1996, some 14 years before Boldt’s tribulations began. The article was titled “Influence of different volume therapy regimens on regulators of the circulation in the critically ill.” It appeared in the British Journal of Anaesthesia, and has been cited 45 times, according to Thomson Scientific’s Web of Knowledge.

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

Lack of ethical clearance prompts expression of concern from bone journal

with 3 comments

jbjsThe Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery has issued an expression of concern about a paper whose authors may not have obtained proper ethical clearance.

Here’s the notice, signed by editor in chief Vernon Tolo: Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Ivan Oransky

December 2, 2013 at 9:30 am

Cardiac arrestees: Questions surface about Heart paper from Italian group that faces charges

with one comment

heartcoverWe don’t usually cover “pretractions” (see #5 for why), but our friend Larry Husten over at Forbes has a story today about what appears to be a dead paper walking.

The article, in Heart, comes from a group of prominent researchers in Italy who have been arrested for possibly failing to adequately consent their patients, among other potential misdeeds.

According to Husten, the 2010 article in question, “A randomised trial of target-vessel versus multi-vessel revascularisation in ST-elevation myocardial infarction: major adverse cardiac events during long-term follow-up,” by Maria Grazia Modena (a past president of the Italian Society of Cardiology) and colleagues, may have been grossly misrepresented to the journal. Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Adam Marcus

October 2, 2013 at 3:20 pm

ORI, OHRP find “some human subject issues” in Henschke lung cancer studies, but no evidence of misconduct

with one comment

cancerWe have an update on two papers about lung cancer screening by Claudia Henschke and colleagues that were subject to an Expression of Concern early last year.

The original Expression of Concern in Cancer read, in part: Read the rest of this entry »

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 35,845 other followers