Retraction Watch

Tracking retractions as a window into the scientific process

Archive for the ‘Uncategorized’ Category

Why did Beall’s List of potential predatory publishers go dark?

with 62 comments

Jeffrey Beall

Jeffrey Beall, the University of Colorado Denver librarian who has since 2008 chronicled “potential, possible, or probable” predatory publishers, has — at least for now — pulled the plug on his influential, and at times controversial, site.

The decision to take down the site — and Beall’s faculty page at the Auraria Library, where he remains a tenured associate professor — was his own, the University of Colorado Denver tells Retraction Watch.

The site, scholarlyoa.com, which just earlier this month included a list of more than 1,000 such publishers, now contains no information. The sudden change was noted Sunday on Twitter, where questions about the move — catalogued, along with some answers, by Emil Karlsson — swirled for two days. Beall’s faculty page was also taken down. Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Ivan Oransky

January 17th, 2017 at 4:24 pm

Posted in Uncategorized

Author pulls Diabetes paper with duplicated Western blots

with 3 comments

diabetesA researcher has retracted a paper from Diabetes after re-using some Western blots in one of the figures from other papers.

According to the retraction notice, the first and corresponding author — Eric Berglund, formerly at Vanderbilt University in Nashville, Tennessee — contacted the journal himself to report the error, for which he takes full responsibility.

Here’s the retraction notice: Read the rest of this entry »

Post you may have missed: Top economists publish in predatory journals

without comments

A technical glitch prevented another story from reaching our email subscribers earlier today, so in case you missed it:

Like Retraction Watch? Consider making a tax-deductible contribution to support our growth. You can also follow us on Twitter, like us on Facebook, add us to your RSS reader, sign up on our homepage for an email every time there’s a new post, or subscribe to our daily digest. Click here to review our Comments Policy. For a sneak peek at what we’re working on, click here.

Written by Alison McCook

October 27th, 2016 at 2:49 pm

Posted in Uncategorized

Posts you may have missed: Macchiarini logs EoC, 4 retractions for cardiovascular researcher

without comments

We get email glitches from time to time, and some alerts don’t go out to readers. In cased you missed them, here are two posts from this week that didn’t make it into your inbox:

Like Retraction Watch? Consider making a tax-deductible contribution to support our growth. You can also follow us on Twitter, like us on Facebook, add us to your RSS reader, sign up on our homepage for an email every time there’s a new post, or subscribe to our daily digest. Click here to review our Comments Policy. For a sneak peek at what we’re working on, click here.

Written by Alison McCook

October 14th, 2016 at 2:28 pm

Posted in Uncategorized

Post you may have missed: E-cigarette debate triggers questions over review process

without comments

toxicology-reportsOur email alert acted up again this morning, so some readers may have missed the first post of the day, about a controversial topic: e-cigarettes.

Click here to read “A paper on chemical safety was accepted one day after submission. Was it peer reviewed?

Like Retraction Watch? Consider making a tax-deductible contribution to support our growth. You can also follow us on Twitter, like us on Facebook, add us to your RSS reader, sign up on our homepage for an email every time there’s a new post, or subscribe to our daily digest. Click here to review our Comments Policy. For a sneak peek at what we’re working on, click here.

Written by Alison McCook

October 5th, 2016 at 3:30 pm

Posted in Uncategorized

Weekend reads: Data sharing fees block access; Machiavellianism and gossip in science; “power pose” redux

with 3 comments

booksThe week at Retraction Watch featured a look at where retractions for fake peer review come from, and an eyebrow-raising plan that has a journal charging would-be whistleblowers a fee. Here’s what was happening elsewhere: Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Ivan Oransky

October 1st, 2016 at 9:50 am

Posted in Uncategorized

Coding error sinks cancer study

with 2 comments

Authors of a 2016 cancer paper have retracted it after finding an error in one line of code in the program used to calculate some of the results. Reposting as our subscription software appears to be acting up again. Read the whole post here.

Written by Alison McCook

September 26th, 2016 at 9:54 am

Posted in Uncategorized

Weekend reads: World’s most prolific peer reviewer; replication backlash carries on; controversial PACE study re-analyzed

with 16 comments

booksThe week at Retraction Watch featured news of a fine for a doctor who took part in a controversial fake trial, and a likely unprecedented call for retraction by the U.S. FDA commissioner. Here’s what was happening elsewhere: Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Ivan Oransky

September 24th, 2016 at 9:30 am

Posted in Uncategorized

Patients Like Me privacy breach complaint sinks paper

without comments

A journal has removed a paper after realizing it contained a verbatim quote from a patient that could reveal the patient’s identity. Reposting as our subscription software appears to be acting up again. Read the whole post here.

Written by Ivan Oransky

September 15th, 2016 at 3:09 pm

Posted in Uncategorized

Ioannidis: We have “massive production of unnecessary, misleading, and conflicted systematic reviews and meta-analyses”

with one comment

Reposting this as our email alerts seem to be down again. Read full post here.

Written by Ivan Oransky

September 13th, 2016 at 9:48 am

Posted in Uncategorized