A kidney journal has retracted a 2019 paper by a group of researchers in China for an unfortunate own-goal.
The article, “The relationship between hemodialysis mortality and the Chinese medical insurance type,” was first published in January in Renal Failure, a Taylor & Francis title. It appeared again in the journal nine months later.
According to the retraction notice:
We, the Editor and Publishers of Renal Failure, have retracted the following article:
Xi Yao, Shaohua Chen, Wenhua Lei, Nan Shi, Weiqiang Lin, Xiaoying Du, Ping Zhang & Jianghua Chen, The relationship between hemodialysis mortality and the Chinese medical insurance type, Renal Failure, 41:1, 2019, 742–749, https://doi/10.1080/0886022X.2019.1652648.
The above article has been retracted as it is an earlier version of an article that was ultimately accepted and published in Renal Failure.
The retracted article will remain online to maintain the scholarly record, but it will be digitally watermarked on each page as “Retracted”.
Tibor Fülöp, the editor of the journal, confirmed that the retraction resulted from a fumble at Taylor & Francis:
Yes, this was an error by the Publisher. There was no malignant intent from any party.
That’s fine, but given that 1. Retractions carry stigma, however unfairly that may be at times; and 2. The notice is silent about intent, malignant or otherwise, we would have preferred to have seen a bit more absolution of the authors in the retraction statement.
Of course, we’ve touched on the issue of “dopey dupe” retractions before.
Like Retraction Watch? You can make a tax-deductible contribution to support our work, follow us on Twitter, like us on Facebook, add us to your RSS reader, or subscribe to our daily digest. If you find a retraction that’s not in our database, you can let us know here. For comments or feedback, email us at [email protected].