Title: Homocysteine as a predictive factor for hip fracture in elderly women with Parkinson’s disease What Caught Our Attention: In a letter to the editor, researchers led by Mark Bolland recently outlined the many reasons why a study by Yoshihiro Sato and colleagues in The American Journal of Medicine was “unreliable,” including evidence that the … Continue reading Caught Our Notice: No retraction for “likely fraudulent” study
Last month, Nature Ecology & Evolution published a series of responses to a previous article recommending essential reading for all ecologists. In one response, the authors argue that the list is highly biased in favor of white male authors, and raises the problem of bullying and harassment in academia. But the letter is missing one … Continue reading Ever been asked to remove a reference for libel concerns? These authors have
As a bone researcher continues to accrue retractions, an investigation at his former university has found misconduct in more than a dozen papers. On Nov. 15, Japan’s Hirosaki University announced it had identified fabrication and authorship issues in 13 papers by Yoshihiro Sato, and plagiarism in another. Sato, a professor at Hirosaki University Medical School … Continue reading University investigation finds misconduct by bone researcher with 23 retractions
A journal has retracted a recent case report about a stem cell therapy in a child with cerebral palsy, after discovering the study failed to meet “ethical standards.” According to the journal, Regenerative Medicine, the ethical issue is that the authors failed to report the case to the Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare of … Continue reading Case report of stem cell therapy in child didn’t meet “ethical standards,” says journal
A bone researcher has lost three more papers for scientific misconduct. The new retractions bring Yoshihiro Sato’s total to 17 and put him on our Leaderboard. According to the retraction notices, Sato asked the Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery, and Psychiatry to retract three of his papers “due to scientific misconduct.” In the letter, Sato—who is corresponding … Continue reading Bone researcher is up to 17 retractions
Last week, JAMA issued some unusual notices, letting readers know they should use caution when reading an editorial and letters associated with now-retracted articles by a bone researcher in Japan. The notices — for papers by Yoshihiro Sato, now up to 14 retractions — remind readers not to heed the results of the now-retracted papers, … Continue reading JAMA tells readers: “Caution advised.” Here’s why.
A sweeping analysis of more than 5,000 papers in eight leading medical journals has found compelling evidence of suspect data in roughly 2% of randomized controlled clinical trials in those journals. Although the analysis, by John Carlisle, an anesthetist in the United Kingdom, could not determine whether the concerning data were tainted by misconduct or … Continue reading Two in 100 clinical trials in eight major journals likely contain inaccurate data: Study
Last year, a researcher cast doubt on a bone scientist’s clinical trials, suggesting some of the findings may not be legitimate. So what’s happened since? Since 2015, journals have retracted 14 papers by bone researcher Yoshihiro Sato, based at Mitate Hospital in Japan, for issues ranging from self-plagiarism, to problems with data, to including co-authors without their consent. … Continue reading A shadow was cast on a bone researcher’s work. What are journals doing about his papers?
The troubles continue for a bone researcher, who’s lost multiple papers in recent months due to problems ranging from data issues to including authors without their consent. Now, journals have retracted two more papers by Yoshihiro Sato. And in a sign of the downstream effects that fraud can have, another journal has retracted two meta-analyses by other … Continue reading Fraud by bone researcher takes down two meta-analyses, a clinical trial, and review
The week at Retraction Watch featured three new ways companies are trying to scam authors, and a look at why one journal is publishing a running tally of their retractions. Here’s what was happening elsewhere: