Retraction Watch

Tracking retractions as a window into the scientific process

Archive for the ‘orthopedics’ Category

BioMed Central retracting 43 papers for fake peer review

with 20 comments

bmc logoBioMed Central is retracting 43 papers, following their investigation into 50 papers that raised suspicions of fake peer review, possibly involving third-party companies selling the service.

In November 2014 we wrote about fake peer reviews for Nature; at that point there had been about 110 retractions across several journals. The addition of 16 retractions by Elsevier for the same reason, and today’s 43 from BMC, brings retractions resulting from the phenomenon up to about 170.

BMC has also contacted institutions regarding 60 additional papers that were rejected for publication, but seem to be part of the same kind of scam. Regarding the third-party agents, BMC senior editor of scientific integrity Elizabeth Moylan writes: Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Cat Ferguson

March 26th, 2015 at 12:05 pm

“Substantial flaws” trip up big toe paper

with 3 comments

rehabRehabilitation Research and Practice has retracted a 2012 review article on stiff big toes.

The article, “Therapeutic Management of the Hallux Rigidus,” came from a group in India. According to the abstract: Read the rest of this entry »

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

without comments

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 »

Weekend reads: Snarky acknowledgement sections, journal editors on fraud

with 6 comments

booksAnother busy week at Retraction Watch, beginning with a story we broke about faked HIV vaccine results that was picked up by the Des Moines Register and other outlets. Here’s what was happening elsewhere on the web: Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Ivan Oransky

December 28th, 2013 at 9:30 am

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 2nd, 2013 at 9:30 am

Third retraction appears for orthopedic surgeon involved in investigation, lawsuits

without comments

orthopedic reviewsIn July, we reported on the unfortunate math of Harish Hosalkar, a San Diego orthopedic surgeon who was at the center of an institutional investigation into the integrity of his data, two lawsuits and three retractions.

At the time, we were waiting on the third retraction, in the journal Orthopedic Reviews. It has now arrived.

The article was titled “Open reduction and internal fixation of displaced clavicle fractures in adolescents,” and Hosalkar wrote it with Gaurav Parikh, James D. Bomar and Bernd Bittersohl. Read the rest of this entry »

Written by amarcus41

November 11th, 2013 at 11:30 am

Tokyo panel calls for retraction of 43 Kato papers

without comments

katoThe University of Tokyo panel investigating the work of a former professor there, Shigeaki Kato, has recommended the retraction of 43 of his group’s articles, according to a report in the Asahi Shimbun newspaper.

If the papers are indeed retracted, Kato, who already has at least five articles subject to an expression of concern and five retractions, would be fifth on the list of most retractions for a single author, by our unofficial tally. His fellow countryman, Yoshitaka Fujii, continues to hold the lead at what appears to be 183, followed by Joachim Boldt (~89), John Darsee (~83), and Diederik Stapel, at 53. [See note at end.]

The Asahi report quotes Kato — who has received some $20 million in government funding for his work  — as acknowledging problems with the data in his studies: Read the rest of this entry »

Written by amarcus41

July 25th, 2013 at 10:21 am

Three retractions, two lawsuits, one institutional inquiry for San Diego orthopedic surgeon

without comments

11832_5_2_OC.inddThree retractions, two lawsuits, one institutional inquiry. That’s not the kind of math anyone likes to do — but it’s the tally for Harish Hosalkar, a San Diego surgeon specializing in pediatric orthopedics.

Hosalkar became embroiled in a messy affair after problems surfaced in data he had published while at Rady Children’s Hospital — a facility he left under a cloud of recriminations. More on that in a bit. Read the rest of this entry »

Lack of conflict of interest disclosure undoes scoliosis study

without comments

scoliosisThe journal Scoliosis has retracted a 2012 paper by a pair of German spine doctors over what the editors have called a less-than-fully declared conflict of interest involving one of the authors.

That should be relatively straigtforward – but it’s not quite. Turns out the article does include a disclosure, although perhaps the information it contains was incomplete.

The article, “Soft braces in the treatment of Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis (AIS) – Review of the literature and description of a new approach,” was written by Hans-Rudolf Weiss and Mario Werkmenn. Weiss, it seems, has something of a pedigree in the field. According to this website, he practices the “Schroth method” of recurvature, a technique pioneered by his grandmother, Katharina Schroth. From the site: Read the rest of this entry »

Written by amarcus41

May 15th, 2013 at 2:00 pm

Post 982 — in which we find plagiarized bone graft paper that grafted from other papers

without comments

thesurgeonThe Surgeon has retracted a 2012 article by a group from the U.K. who took text from a previously published article. So, you say? Nu?

Well, we found — through relatively little effort — that the plagiarizees were themselves, shall we say, liberal in their use of material from other sources.

The retracted article was titled “Bone graft substitutes: What are the options?,” and it appeared in August 2012. One of the options, we guess, was to steal text.

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

Written by amarcus41

March 22nd, 2013 at 1:00 pm