In an episode reminiscent of the AI-generated graphic of a rat with a giant penis, another paper with an anatomically incorrect image has been retracted after it attracted attention on social media. The authors admit using ChatGPT to make the diagram.
According to the retraction notice published July 12, the article, by researchers at Guangdong Provincial Hydroelectric Hospital in Guangzhou, China, was retracted after “concerns were raised over the integrity of the data and an inaccurate figure.”
The paper, published in Lippincott’s Medicine, purported to describe a randomized controlled trial that found alkaline water could reduce pain and alleviate symptoms of chronic gouty arthritis.
Morgan Pfiffner, a researcher for Examine.com, an online database for nutrition and supplement research, first noticed the study while on vacation and posted on X about the erroneous diagram in the article.
“I planned to inform the journal when I got back, but that graphic was just too absurd not to share on social media once I saw it,” Pfiffner told Retraction Watch. Another X user found the paper’s introduction to be 100% AI-generated.
Commenters including Elizabeth Bik and Thomas Kesteman chimed in on PubPeer, echoing Pfiffner’s concerns. Bik pointed out that Figure 4 had the wrong number of bones in the lower leg and arm and had nonsensical labels such as “chlsinkestead atlvs no ctivktty greuedis” and “Aliainine jerve sreiter.” She also noted inconsistencies in the data and seemingly unrealistic methods.
Kesteman highlighted additional issues: Some of the references in the article do not appear in PubMed or Google Scholar, and the authors’ email addresses were not institutional – which, we note, is considered a red flag but not always a sign of problems. Further, the results of some statistical analyses were “virtually impossible,” Kesteman said, and data on pain scores in a table “present patterns that are impossible to find in real life.”
Yong Wu, the corresponding author of the study, told Retraction Watch English is not the team’s first language, and the cost for translation was prohibitively expensive.
“Therefore, our research team has resorted to using AI for text translation and refinement. Similarly, the expense of scientific illustration is beyond our means, which led us to use ChatGPT for generating research diagrams,” Wu said. “We apologize for any controversy this may have caused.”
A spokesperson for Medicine said the journal is continually improving its editorial review process. “We are working on a number of initiatives to help shape the future of medical research reviews based on collaboration with other leading publishers, dedication to peer reviews and leveraging new technologies,” they said.
“It seems to me that AI graphic itself was just the tip of the iceberg of research misconduct permeating that study,” Pfiffner said. “I’m glad it has been swiftly retracted.”
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].
I’m surprised it passed peer review. Look how funny this image is!