Exclusive: Former Tufts researcher suspended from animal work after abuse

A researcher and former faculty member at Tufts School of Medicine in Boston has been banned from working with animals for a year following repeated cases of abuse under his supervision, according to documents obtained by an animal-rights group.

In an Oct. 26, 2022, letter to the federal Office of Laboratory Animal Welfare, the university reported “serious and continuing noncompliance with” animal-welfare regulations. These breaches included “injections in mice via an unapproved route/location, failure to provide required analgesia, inadequate supportive care and monitoring, and failure to euthanize mice upon reaching the approved humane endpoints,” Tufts said.

When asked for his comments, the researcher “refuted most of the allegations and took no responsibility for his actions,” the university added.

Continue reading Exclusive: Former Tufts researcher suspended from animal work after abuse

Weekend reads: Plagiarism allegations swirl around superconductor scientist; the ice cream studies no one wants to talk about; when fraud doesn’t pay

Would you consider a donation to support Weekend Reads, and our daily work?

The week at Retraction Watch featured:

Our list of retracted or withdrawn COVID-19 papers is up to more than 300. There are more than 39,000 retractions in our database — which powers retraction alerts in EndNoteLibKeyPapers, 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):

Continue reading Weekend reads: Plagiarism allegations swirl around superconductor scientist; the ice cream studies no one wants to talk about; when fraud doesn’t pay

‘Misleading’ and ‘false’ portrayal of racism-related experiences leads to retraction

A health services journal has retracted a recent commentary about diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) activities at the University of Minnesota after the authors said they had unintentionally “mischaracterized the authenticity of experiences represented.” 

The four-page commentary, titled “Transactional and transformative diversity, equity, and inclusion activities in health services research departments,” had appeared in the journal Health Services Research for almost three months before its retraction in March. It was co-authored by three employees at the University of Minnesota: professor Janette Dill, lecturer Stuart Grande and Tongtan Chantarat, a research scientist at the institution. 

The article details the DEI-related activities within the school’s Division of Health Policy and Management that were implemented from 2020 onwards amid calls for racial equity. (Minneapolis, where the university’s main campus is based, was the site of George Floyd’s murder in May 2020.) They label some efforts as “performative”, but go on to outline hopes for “transformative change” in the division – referring to attempts to build trust and relationships with students and faculty belonging to racial and ethnic minority groups. 

Continue reading ‘Misleading’ and ‘false’ portrayal of racism-related experiences leads to retraction

Author denies Chinese censorship prompted COVID-19 retraction

The corresponding author of a recently published – and then quickly retracted – letter in The Lancet decrying the failure of the Chinese Ministry of Health to pay doctors and other health care workers says authorities did not pressure him to withdraw the piece.

The letter begins:

As the COVID-19 pandemic comes to an end in China, medical personnel who have worked tirelessly to fight the omicron (B.1.1.529) variant are now facing a new challenge. Despite their heroic efforts, many of them are now struggling to receive the financial compensation they deserve.

The second sentence cites a blog post on Weixin

Continue reading Author denies Chinese censorship prompted COVID-19 retraction

Journal hasn’t retracted ‘Super Size Me’ paper six months after authors’ request

Six months after the authors of a 2012 paper requested its retraction, a marketing journal is still investigating the concerns,  Retraction Watch has learned. Other researchers had failed to replicate the findings – that consumers choose portion sizes based on their desire to signal higher social status –  and discovered anomalies in the data. 

The paper, “Super Size Me: Product Size as a Signal of Status,” appeared in the Journal of Consumer Research and attracted media attention from The New York Times and NPR, among other outlets. The lay media interpreted the findings as helping to explain the rise in obesity in the United States. The article has been cited 180 times, according to Clarivate’s Web of Science. 

The same authors requested the retraction of another paper, “Dynamics of Communicator and Audience Power: The Persuasiveness of Competence versus Warmth, published in 2016 and cited 61 times, which the journal is also still investigating.

Continue reading Journal hasn’t retracted ‘Super Size Me’ paper six months after authors’ request

Former Yale prof faked data, says Federal watchdog

Carlo Spirli

A liver researcher who worked at Yale University for 15 years faked data in multiple papers and grant applications, according to the U.S. Office of Research Integrity (ORI).

Carlo Spirli, who rose to the rank of associate professor before leaving Yale in 2020, “engaged in research misconduct by knowingly, intentionally, or recklessly falsifying and/or fabricating data” in four published papers, two presentations, and three NIH grant applications, the ORI said in announcing its findings today.

Spirli, according to the ORI:

Continue reading Former Yale prof faked data, says Federal watchdog

Weekend reads: Drug company loses defamation suit against journal; Canada a whistleblower wasteland?; UT-Austin can revoke degrees after all

Would you consider a donation to support Weekend Reads, and our daily work?

The week at Retraction Watch featured:

Our list of retracted or withdrawn COVID-19 papers is up to more than 300. There are more than 39,000 retractions in our database — which powers retraction alerts in EndNoteLibKeyPapers, 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):

Continue reading Weekend reads: Drug company loses defamation suit against journal; Canada a whistleblower wasteland?; UT-Austin can revoke degrees after all

“Unapproved euthanasia” of rats in neuroscience study leads to retraction

Subimal Datta

A 2017 paper describing neuroscience research with rats has been retracted after “data mis-management,” including the mistreatment of the animals, came to light. 

The retracted paper was the second by Subimal Datta, a professor of psychology and anesthesiology at the University of Tennessee, Knoxville, to receive a flag for data problems. 

The article, “BNDF heterozygosity is associated with memory deficits and alterations in cortical and hippocampal EEG power,” was published in Behavioural Brain Research and has been cited 14 times, according to Clarivate’s Web of Science. 

The retraction notice, published March 31, stated: 

Continue reading “Unapproved euthanasia” of rats in neuroscience study leads to retraction

High-profile paper that used AI to identify suicide risk from brain scans retracted for flawed methods

Marcel Adam Just

In 2017, a paper published in Nature Human Behavior made international headlines for the authors’ claim they had developed a way to analyze brain scans using machine learning to identify youth at risk for suicide. 

“It was a big, splashy finding,” said Timothy Verstynen, an associate professor of psychology at Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh, who was not involved in the research. But at a neuroimaging conference soon after the publication, other researchers discussed the study “in kind of a sense of disbelief,” he said. 

The 91% accuracy for identifying suicidality that the researchers reported, from a sample size of just a few dozen participants, he said, “kind of went against what we as a field were starting to understand about the nature of these brain phenotype markers based off of neuroimaging data.” 

After six years of scrutiny, during which Verstynen attempted to replicate the work but found a key problem, the authors of the 2017 paper have retracted the article. 

Continue reading High-profile paper that used AI to identify suicide risk from brain scans retracted for flawed methods

Wiley and Hindawi to retract 1,200 more papers for compromised peer review

Hindawi and Wiley, its parent company, have identified approximately 1,200 articles with compromised peer review that the publishers will begin retracting this month. 

Jay Flynn, executive vice president and general manager of the research division at Wiley, which acquired Hindawi in 2021, wrote about the forthcoming retractions in a blog post at Scholarly Kitchen yesterday.

The plan to retract 1,200 articles, which the publisher expects to take a few months, follows Hindawi’s announcement last September that it would retract 511 articles across 16 journals for manipulated peer review. (We’ve tracked 501 retractions from 23 Hindawi journals since the announcement.)

Continue reading Wiley and Hindawi to retract 1,200 more papers for compromised peer review