About these ads

Retraction Watch

Tracking retractions as a window into the scientific process

Weekend reads: Problems with a Science paper, how to cite properly (and improperly)

with 5 comments

booksAnother super-busy week at Retraction Watch. Here’s what was happening in around the web in scientific publishing, misconduct, and related issues: Read the rest of this entry »

About these ads

Written by ivanoransky

April 12, 2014 at 10:59 am

“[W]e did not succeed:” Frontiers editor on handling of controversial retraction

with 29 comments

frontiersControversy continues to swirl around the retraction of a Frontiers paper linking climate skepticism to conspiratorial ideation, with three editors resigning from various Frontiers journals, and competing narratives. The authors say the journal retracted the paper because of a fear of legal threats, while the journal, and critics of the study, has said it was withdrawn because the paper did not protect the rights of its subjects.

Whatever the issues with the paper, we and others have been saying that the journal stumbled since the study was first retracted last year. The publisher continues to insist, for example, that there is no contradiction between their retraction notice — agreed upon by the editors and the authors — which said that the journal “did not identify any issues with the academic and ethical aspects of the study” and a later statement saying that the paper “did not sufficiently protect the rights of the studied subjects.”

Today, editor-in-chief Henry Markham acknowledged missteps in a blog post. Here’s how it starts:

Read the rest of this entry »

Written by ivanoransky

April 11, 2014 at 1:25 pm

Fraud fells Alzheimer’s “made to order” neurons paper in Cell

with 7 comments

cell414In 2011, a group of researchers at Columbia University reported in Cell that they had been able to convert skin cells from patients with Alzheimer’s disease into functioning neurons — a finding that raised the exciting prospect of “made to order” brain cells for patients with the degenerative disease. As one researcher not involved with the study, led by Asa Abeliovich, put it:

“[This is] simply a remarkable and complete piece of work which will now set a standard for stem cell work in neurological disease. The standard of the characterization of the neuronal cultures is very high,” John Hardy at University College London, U.K., wrote to [Alzforum]. He was not involved in the work but is taking a similar approach in his own lab.

According to the abstract of “Directed Conversion of Alzheimer’s Disease Patient Skin Fibroblasts into Functional Neurons:”

Read the rest of this entry »

Harvard-Brigham heart researcher under investigation earns Lancet Expression of Concern

with 7 comments

logo_lancetOn Tuesday, we broke the news of the retraction in Circulation of a paper on cardiac stem cells by a group of researchers being investigated by Harvard Medical School and the Brigham and Women’s Hospital. Today, The Lancet has issued an Expression of Concern about another paper led by Piero Anversa, the last author of the Circulation paper.

Read the rest of this entry »

Written by ivanoransky

April 11, 2014 at 6:44 am

Following “personal attacks and threats,” Elsevier plant journal makes author persona non grata

with 71 comments

Scientia HorticulturaeAn Elsevier journal has taken “the exceptional step of ceasing to communicate” with a scientist-critic after a series of “unfounded personal attacks and threats.” The move means that the journal, Scientia Horticulturae, will not review any papers that include the critic, Jaime A. Teixeira da Silva, as an author.

Here is the text of the letter (pdf here, obtained from an anonymous source), signed by Gert Jan-Geraeds:

Read the rest of this entry »

Written by ivanoransky

April 10, 2014 at 1:52 pm

Lack of citation prompts correction in Nature journal

with 23 comments

nature communicationsIt’s not unusual to hear authors bemoan the fact that a new paper doesn’t cite their work that set the stage for a scientific advance. “The journal limited me to [a seemingly abitrary number of] references,” authors sometimes shrug, with or without apology. This week, however, we found a case of that which seems to have been resolved to everyone’s satisfaction.

The authors of a September 2013 article in Nature Communications have issued a correction for the piece, which failed to cite the source of a key step in their experiment.

The article, “Val66Met polymorphism of BDNF alters prodomain structure to induce neuronal growth cone retraction,” came from the lab of William “Clay” Bracken, a biochemist at Weill Cornell Medical College. According to the abstract: Read the rest of this entry »

Retraction four appears for Dirk Smeesters

with 6 comments

smeestersDirk Smeesters, the former psychology professor at Erasmus University found to have committed misconduct, has had another paper retracted.

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

Written by ivanoransky

April 10, 2014 at 7:16 am


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 31,093 other followers