Weekend reads: A JAMA editor resigns; why correcting the record takes so long; focus on predatory journals

Before we present this week’s Weekend Reads, a question: Do you enjoy our weekly roundup? If so, we could really use your help. Would you consider a tax-deductible donation to support Weekend Reads, and our daily work? Thanks in advance.

The week at Retraction Watch featured:

Our list of retracted or withdrawn COVID-19 papers is up to 87.

Here’s what was happening elsewhere (some of these items may be paywalled, metered access, or require free registration to read):

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 team@retractionwatch.com.

2 thoughts on “Weekend reads: A JAMA editor resigns; why correcting the record takes so long; focus on predatory journals”

  1. The article referred to here “Why does it take so long to resolve concerns about figures in scientific publications?” mentions Dr. Bik’s use of software called “Image Twin”. Unfortunately I cannot locate this software online and the article did not include a link. Can someone point me to this software? Thanks!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.