In 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.
According to the retraction notice:
The authors have retracted their paper Open reduction and internal fixation of displaced clavicle fractures in adolescents. Specifically, upon further review, the authors have noted some errata in the data collection. The authors’ clinical experience does not lead them to change the main conclusions of the paper, but due to the observed mistakes, they decided to retract the previously published article.
That’s a nifty construction. Our data don’t support our beliefs. But our beliefs are right, so we can ignore the data. Where have we heard that before?
The paper has been cited once, according to Thomson Scientific’s Web of Knowledge, by another paper by Hosalkar. That article, as we reported in July, includes an erratum referring to the now-retracted paper.
I think there is a broken bone here