PubPeer Selections: On an “immodest title;” authors recalculate findings in response to questions

Here’s another installment of PubPeer Selections:

• “In my opinion, the immodest title of this paper is not supported by its contents,” writes Hilda Bastain at PubMed Commons of “Enhancing dentate gyrus function with dietary flavanols improves cognition in older adults.” A PubPeer commenter links to that and another comment on the paper.
• “Because of the questions of Anonymous, we recalculated the findings of Table 3.” The authors of a Neuropsychiatric Diseases and Treatment study respond to questions.
• “[O]ther than the introduction, the papers have 90% identical text.” A commenter compares a 2007 paper to one from 2006 1996.
• “Readers should interpret the findings of this paper with caution.” A commenter takes issue with a 2010 paper in The American Journal of Pathology.
• Figure 5B of a Journal of Biological Chemistry paper comes under scrutiny.