Weekend reads: ‘Invasion of the journal snatchers;’ our paper mill investigation; highly cited, highly retracted

Dear RW readers, can you spare $25?

The week at Retraction Watch featured:

Our list of retracted or withdrawn COVID-19 papers is up past 500. There are more than 55,000 retractions in The Retraction Watch Database — which is now part of Crossref. The Retraction Watch Hijacked Journal Checker now contains more than 300 titles. And have you seen our leaderboard of authors with the most retractions lately — or our list of top 10 most highly cited retracted papers? What about The Retraction Watch Mass Resignations List — or our list of nearly 100 papers with evidence they were written by ChatGPT?

Here’s what was happening elsewhere (some of these items may be paywalled, metered access, or require free registration to read):

Continue reading Weekend reads: ‘Invasion of the journal snatchers;’ our paper mill investigation; highly cited, highly retracted

How academic leaders should respond to shock and awe

Eugenie Reich

The first weeks of the second Trump administration have brought unprecedented shock and awe to science. In response, the leaders of the scientific community must cease their hand-wringing and align behind two strong approaches to dealing with the chaos: protest and candor.

I write these words as an attorney representing whistleblowers of scientific fraud. Prior to law school, I was an investigative journalist focused on this same phenomenon. Today I represent scientists and technical experts independent of whether the falsified data they have uncovered support a political agenda. Twenty years of experience investigating, exposing and, when necessary, litigating cases of scientific fraud, has, however, led me to think in terms of a different kind of politics: the politics of nonconfirmatory data. Any research-based organization – a university, a healthcare provider, a laboratory or a corporation – faces a daily challenge from data gathered by scientists within that contradict the scientific hypotheses that are bringing in the money.

Continue reading How academic leaders should respond to shock and awe

Sage journal retracts another 400 papers

Sage has retracted 416 articles from the Journal of Intelligent and Fuzzy Systems (JIFS), which had a mass retraction of over 450 papers last August. 

Before the mass retraction last year, which we covered, Sage paused publication of new articles from the journal, which it acquired when it bought IOS Press in 2023. The journal is now accepting new submissions, according to a Sage spokesperson. 

The retraction notice mentions citation and referencing “anomalies,” “incoherent, extraneous text and tortured phrases” and “unverifiable authors and reviewers,” among other signs of misconduct. “These indicators raise concerns about the authenticity of the research and the peer review process underlying the following articles. The Publisher regrets that these were not flagged during the journal’s editorial and peer review processes,” the notice reads.

Most of the researchers are from universities in India and China. 

Continue reading Sage journal retracts another 400 papers

Former student was running a paper mill, says University of Manchester

Sameer Quazi

An English university has issued a finding of research misconduct against a former graduate student and is requesting 10 retractions of his published work, which they say bears the marks of being papermilled. 

The former student, Sameer Quazi, was enrolled at the University of Manchester in 2021 in the school’s “PGCert” program in clinical bioinformatics, according to his LinkedIn profile. The certificate program sits between undergraduate and masters training. Quazi’s profile states he is currently enrolled in a master’s program in biomedical sciences at Anglia Ruskin University, in Cambridge. (Update, 2/7/25: As of 2/3/25, his LinkedIn profile says he left there this month, and Ruskin tells us his course there ended in March 2023.)

According to a January 30 statement from the university: 

Continue reading Former student was running a paper mill, says University of Manchester

Anatomy of a retraction: When cleaning up the literature takes six years

Dario Alessi

In 2018, a biochemist in Scotland became aware of image irregularities in two of his papers through comments on PubPeer, each in a different journal. The researcher, Dario Alessi, a professor at the University of Dundee, said he alerted his home institution immediately.

In July and October 2024, the papers were retracted.

Emails obtained by Retraction Watch through a public records request show what happened in the intervening six years: Consecutive investigations by Dundee and a funder, then delays as the journals juggled conflicting narratives. In the meantime, the papers continued racking up citations.

Continue reading Anatomy of a retraction: When cleaning up the literature takes six years

Journal updates retraction notice to include plagiarism following Retraction Watch report

The editor-in-chief of a journal updated a retraction notice to acknowledge the data in the paper were “completely plagiarized” following allegations in a letter to the editor that were the subject of a Retraction Watch post last week. 

The original retraction, requested by the authors, cited only “major errors in data.” The notice for the October 2023 paper, which is signed by the Indian Journal for Critical Care Medicine (IJCCM) editor-in-chief Atul Kulkarni, now reads: 

Following scrutiny of the article further and other facts brought to the notice of the IJCCM, I have decided to change the reason for the retraction. This article is withdrawn after having been found that the data was completely plagiarized (in toto) from the work of another researcher.

Continue reading Journal updates retraction notice to include plagiarism following Retraction Watch report

Weekend reads: ‘The Temporal Crisis’; researcher sues university that fired him; ‘Devastating Legacy of Lies’

Dear RW readers, can you spare $25?

The week at Retraction Watch featured:

Our list of retracted or withdrawn COVID-19 papers is up past 450. There are more than 55,000 retractions in The Retraction Watch Database — which is now part of Crossref. The Retraction Watch Hijacked Journal Checker now contains more than 300 titles. And have you seen our leaderboard of authors with the most retractions lately — or our list of top 10 most highly cited retracted papers? What about The Retraction Watch Mass Resignations List — or our list of nearly 100 papers with evidence they were written by ChatGPT?

Here’s what was happening elsewhere (some of these items may be paywalled, metered access, or require free registration to read):

Continue reading Weekend reads: ‘The Temporal Crisis’; researcher sues university that fired him; ‘Devastating Legacy of Lies’

Paper retracted after author told journal study was ‘not actually performed’

Nearly 20 years after the publication of a paper on phytoestrogens in postmenopausal women, one of the authors said the study had never been performed, according to a recently published retraction notice.

The retraction is the second for two of the authors. It comes after sleuth Ben Mol and his colleagues initially discovered data similarities between the recently-retracted study and another by the same group, as we reported last year. 

The two papers that seem to share data appeared in Fertility and Sterility, an Elsevier publication, in 2004 and 2006. 

Continue reading Paper retracted after author told journal study was ‘not actually performed’

Thousands demand withdrawal of review article recommending exercise therapy for chronic fatigue syndrome

The decision to abandon a process to re-evaluate a review recommending exercise therapy for chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS) has reignited calls for the article to be withdrawn. 

The 2019 version of the Cochrane Library review, “Exercise therapy for chronic fatigue syndrome,” has accumulated 67 citations, according to Clarivate’s Web of Science. 

The review recommends exercise therapy to treat ME/CFS, a treatment approach that drew widespread criticism from the patient community and researchers, who say physical activity isn’t an adequate remedy for the condition. According to the petition, Cochrane’s former editor-in-chief admitted the review in question wasn’t “fit for purpose,” although the editor-in-chief’s statement did not use that phrase.

Continue reading Thousands demand withdrawal of review article recommending exercise therapy for chronic fatigue syndrome

Researcher alleges group stole thesis data presented at conference

A researcher in India has asked a journal to amend a retraction “for major errors in data” because, he says, the data weren’t wrong – they were stolen.

The October 2023 paper, “Prediction of Weaning Outcome from Mechanical Ventilation Using Ultrasound Assessment of Parasternal Intercostal Muscle Thickness,” was originally published in the Indian Journal of Critical Care Medicine (IJCCM). The journal is published by JP Medical, and is indexed in Clarviate’s Web of Science. 

The undated retraction statement says the authors “wish to withdraw the article . . . due to major errors in data.” The DOI no longer links to the article, and the full text is no longer available online. 

In a letter to the editor published Nov. 30, 2024 in IJCCM, researcher Sundara Kannan alleged the authors stole his data. 

Continue reading Researcher alleges group stole thesis data presented at conference