An investigation into the work of a researcher at Western University “resulted in a clear determination of research misconduct,” according to a retraction notice, but details are scant.
Here’s the notice for “Synthetic peptides derived from salivary proteins and the control of surface charge densities of dental surfaces improve the inhibition of dental calculus formation,” published in Materials Science and Engineering: C in 2017 by Bernd Grohe:
In letters to Materials Science and Engineering C, the Vice-President (Research) of Western University has requested this retraction. This follows an extensive investigation conducted by an external investigator that resulted in a clear determination of research misconduct by Dr. Grohe under Western’s Policy on Academic and Research Integrity.
The paper has been cited six times, according to Clarivate Analytics’ Web of Science.
Asked for a copy of the investigation report, and whether Grohe was still employed by Western, the university’s vice president for research, Lesley Rigg, said in a letter to Retraction Watch:
Western is not able to share the investigation report, and is not at liberty to disclose information such as employment status. Any questions in that regard should be directed to the author of the Article.
Grohe’s Western email did not bounce, but he did not respond to requests for comment sent there and to his personal email.
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].
“Western is… not at liberty to disclose information such as employment status.” I’m not sure this is common. Most employers will confirm whether or not someone is employed by them. If termination proceedings or settlement negotiations are not yet final they can say he is “currently employed.”