Would you consider a donation to support Weekend Reads, and our daily work? Thanks in advance.
The week at Retraction Watch featured:
- Paper by gene therapy Zolgensma developer retracted because of discrepancies in mouse survival rates
- Med school vice dean says he’s correcting paper amid negative misconduct inquiry
- A grad student finds a ‘typo’ in a psychedelic study’s script that leads to a retraction
- When failure to correct a flawed paper could put patients’ lives at risk
- Frankincense extract paper is 30th retracted by former MD Anderson researcher who once threatened to sue Retraction Watch
Our list of retracted or withdrawn COVID-19 papers is up to 265. There are more than 36,000 retractions in our database — which powers retraction alerts in EndNote, LibKey, Papers, and Zotero. And have you seen our leaderboard of authors with the most retractions lately — or our list of top 10 most highly cited retracted papers?
Here’s what was happening elsewhere (some of these items may be paywalled, metered access, or require free registration to read):
- “ExxonMobil ordered to reinstate fired whistleblowers who alleged fraud.”
- “Characteristics of Retracted Research Articles About COVID-19 vs Other Topics.”
- “This video got me thinking about a different metaphor: journals as the sewage works standing between pipes full of untreated research and the pristine beaches of public discourse.”
- “Our model estimated that submissions between midday and 1 PM had the lowest odds of rejection, although the most common submission time was after 3 PM.”
- “Australia does not want to share health data.”
- “So far, 879 studies have been completely withdrawn, 116 disclaimers have been issued and 952 corrections have been made through [Elisabeth Bik’s] her intervention.”
- “Despite agreeing to make raw data available, some authors fail to comply.”
- “Forecasting the publication and citation outcomes of COVID-19 preprints.”
- “While traditional funding mechanisms are certainly not perfect, scientific communities should think twice before adopting fast funding as a new standard for funding.”
- “Urgency of knowledge generation during the covid-19 pandemic: a retrospective on integrity in health publications.”
- “Shane Tuck inquest to be held in July after plagiarism investigation delays hearings.”
- “What’s Happening When Living Systematic Reviews…Stop?”
- “Spin and reporting in systematic reviews with meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials in restorative dentistry.”
- “Romania’s plagiarism hunter becomes the hunted.”
- “Romanian president tries to save flagship education strategy after plagiarism scandal.”
- “After scrambling fall courses by withdrawing more than 1,380 ebooks, Wiley now says it will restore access to the course materials.”
- “Building Trust in Science Communication: The Role of Journals & Journalists, Pre-& Post-Publication.”
- “Prevalence and Sources of Duplicate Information in the Electronic Medical Record.”
- “Standing on the shoulders of giants: How star scientists influence their coauthors.”
- “Retraction of masturbation study ‘troubling for free speech,’” an academic argues in a paper.
- Reproducibility’s new rule of three.”
- “Why We Need More Quality Control in Science Funding…”
- Thanks to corruption and other issues, “Iran risks becoming a nation bereft of its best minds.”
- “Don’t dodge retraction of fraudulent papers. The author in 2010.
- Papers by Carlo Croce earn an expression of concern and a retraction following recent revelations in the case.
- “I avoided authorship discussions with collaborators—until I learned some hard lessons.”
- “White House’s open-access research directive scrambles long-entrenched models, raising key questions.”
- “The credibility of science is damaged when universities brag about themselves.” On the attention economy.
- “Is it ethical to be friends with research participants?”
- “Science is paradoxically and simultaneously a source of both purity and tarnish.”
- “‘SNL’ Accused of Ripping off Charmin Toilet Paper Bear Sketch.”
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].