Robert Getzenberg, a former researcher at Hopkins and Pitt, has retracted a sixth paper, this one in Cancer Research.
Here’s the notice for “Mechanistic Analysis of the Role of BLCA-4 in Bladder Cancer Pathobiology:” Continue reading Former Hopkins and Pitt cancer researcher notches sixth retraction
Chemistry blogger See Arr Oh was a bit irritated one day last week.
He’d found a correction in Organometallics, an American Chemical Society (ACS) journal, and the ACS wanted $35 to read it: Continue reading Should all correction notices be open access?
Climacteric is retracting a 2013 article by a group of researchers in Seoul who used data from a paper by another duo of Korean scientists also published in, you guessed it, Climacteric.
The paper, “Different bone mineral density in cervical and endometrial cancer,” came from a group of Soonchunhyang University and was published online late last year. It purported to look at the association between gynecologic cancers and bone mineral density: Continue reading Bone-headed move? Authors of cancer-skeleton paper copy from paper in same journal
A group of researchers have lost a paper in a computer science journal because they were apparently using its references to help the impact factor of a different journal that one of them edits.
Here’s the notice for “Impacts of sensor node distributions on coverage in sensor networks,” a paper first published in 2011 and cited four times, according to Thomson Scientific’s Web of Knowledge: Continue reading Citation manipulation: Journal retracts paper because author boosted references to a journal he edits
A blog post at another site that picked up on our coverage of Benjamin Jacob Hayempour, the researcher who has two retractions and has threatened to sue us, has been removed following a Digital Millenium Copyright Act (DMCA) takedown notice.
As Andrew Oh-Willkie, the blogger, writes in an account of the incident: Continue reading DMCA notice forces removal of post critical of author who threatened to sue Retraction Watch
Another busy week at Retraction Watch. Here’s what was going on around the web in scientific publishing and related issues:
We have a report about a case report of a “rare presentation” that doesn’t seem to be as rare as the authors would like is to think it is.
Here’s what we’re talking about:
Living Cell Technologies (LCT), a biotech company headquartered in Australia, has retracted a 2011 paper purporting to show that their product reversed Parkinson’s symptoms in rats after “being unable to reconfirm their reported results and a possible deviation from the protocol.”
LCT is developing NTCELL, which, according to their site: Continue reading Biotech company retracts Parkinson’s treatment study after “possible deviation from protocol”
On Saturday, we highlighted a great two-part series by Joseph Neff of the News & Observer diving into the story of “Stefan Franzen, a chemistry professor at North Carolina State University who has been trying unsuccessfully to correct the scientific record.” Today, that series became a three-part series, with a new story revealing that an investigation by the National Science Foundation (NSF) Office of the Inspector General (OIG) had found “reckless” falsification in the work in question.
One of the key papers in the controversy was published by Lina A. Gugliotti, Daniel L. Feldheim, and Bruce E. Eaton in Science in 2004 and cited 125 times, according to Thomson Scientific’s Web of Knowledge. (Eaton is now at the University of Colorado at Boulder.) In 2011, Nature reported on the situation: Continue reading Science hasn’t retracted paper that university, NSF investigators wanted withdrawn
Neurology has issued an expression of concern over a 2013 article by a group of scientists in The Netherlands and the United States who found a potentially devastating error in their analysis.
The article, “Structural and functional brain connectivity in presymptomatic familial frontotemporal dementia,” came from the lab of John C. van Swieten, of Erasmus University in The Netherlands. According to the abstract of the article: Continue reading Neurology expresses concern over dementia study after authors report error in analysis