Would you consider a donation to support Weekend Reads, and our daily work? Thanks in advance.
The week at Retraction Watch featured:
- Board members decry their own journal’s retraction of paper on predatory publishers
- A paper used capital T’s instead of error bars. But wait, there’s more!
- Publisher retracts 400 papers at once for violations of ‘peer-review process policies’
- Professor emeritus loses fourth paper after UCSF-VA investigation, five years after other retractions
Our list of retracted or withdrawn COVID-19 papers is up to 278. There are more than 37,000 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):
- “A call for error management in academic clinical research.”
- “Indicators of questionable research practices were identified in 163,129 randomized controlled trials.”
- “AI generated texts should lead us to re-value creativity in academic writing.”
- “Paleontologist accused of faking data in dino-killing asteroid paper.” He “denies claims he made up data to scoop a former collaborator.”
- “Who Is Responsible For Research Fraud Anyway?”
- “Evaluation of Publication of COVID-19–Related Articles Initially Presented as Preprints.”
- “Journals to trial tool that automatically flags reproducibility and transparency issues in papers.”
- “When publishing becomes the sole focus of PhD programmes academia suffers.”
- Taiwan’s ministry of education “declines to probe supervisor of politicians’ plagiarized theses.”
- A former University of Pennsylvania researcher has had another paper retracted. Background here.
- More than three years after sleuths flagged problems to editors, a group of nutrition researchers has had two more papers retracted, making eight.
- “The promise and plight of open data” at science journals.
- “Paper-mill detector put to the test in push to stamp out fake science.”
- “Voice of America removes story that embarrassed Vietnam’s prime minister.”
- “Groups Seek Substantive Revisions to HHS Misconduct Regs, Investigations.”
- “A case of scientific misconduct agitates a chemical research laboratory.”
- “Conflict of interest leads member of special committee investigating Stanford president to step aside.”
- A journal editor resigns “After a Diversity Debate Is Derailed.”
- “Musk’s Neuralink faces federal probe, employee backlash over animal tests.”
- “A comprehensive overview of studies that assessed article retractions within the biomedical sciences.”
- As Springer Nature acquires Cureus, a thread looking back at our coverage of the journal over the years.
- “Can academic publishers resist self-censorship in China?”
- “Protection of the human gene research literature from…research paper mills.”
- “We also searched the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, regulatory agency websites, and Retraction Watch.” “Efficacy and safety of COVID-19 vaccines.”
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].