Exclusive: NYU cancer center director suspended

Benjamin Neel

The director of one the nation’s premier cancer centers has been suspended amid concerns over several of his papers – but he tells Retraction Watch it is unrelated to comments about that work on PubPeer. 

An email Wednesday to employees at New York University’s medical center – and a subsequent message to staff at the institution’s Perlmutter Cancer Center – explained that Benjamin Neel, the former director of the center, had been suspended. 

The letter, signed by Steven Abramson, a rheumatologist and executive vice president at NYU Langone Health, did not state the reason for the move:  

Continue reading Exclusive: NYU cancer center director suspended

Paper that helped form basis of pricy research tool retracted

Donald Morisky

Nearly four years after a critic pointed out flaws in a paper about a controversial research tool involved in nearly 20 retractions, the owner of that instrument has lost the article after he failed to overcome the editors’ concerns about the work. 

The owner is Donald Morisky, of the University of California, Los Angeles, whose name should be well-familiar to readers of Retraction Watch. 

Morisky developed the Morisky Medication Adherence Scale (MMAS), then began charging researchers up to six-figure sums to license the use of the tool in their own studies. Those who didn’t sign agreements in advance were ordered to retract their papers that used the MMAS, pay Morisky’s company retroactively, or risk legal action. (We wrote about all this in Science back in 2017. We also wrote about how Morisky and his former business partner, Steve Trubow, have been engaged in litigation over ownership of a spin-off “widget” Trubow says belongs to him. That case is ongoing.)

Continue reading Paper that helped form basis of pricy research tool retracted

The new retraction record holder is a German anesthesiologist, with 184

Ludwigshafen Hospital, via Wikimedia

The German anesthesiologist Joachim Boldt has lost 20 more papers since January 2023, earning him the top spot in our leaderboard, with 184 retractions. 

Boldt, readers may recall, was once one of the leading international figures in perioperative medicine. His work, particularly studies involving the use of fluid management during surgery, helped inform clinical guidelines that, thanks to his misdeeds, some experts believe may have put patients at risk for serious harm and even death.

Boldt has vaulted over another anesthesiologist, Yoshitaka Fujii, to take the crown (more on that in a moment) – although one might fairly ask: Why did it take so long?

Continue reading The new retraction record holder is a German anesthesiologist, with 184

Former UPenn prof faked more than 50 figures, says government watchdog

William Armstead

A pharmacy researcher who left the University of Pennsylvania sometime last year has been found guilty of research misconduct in multiple federal grant applications and five published papers, four of which have already been retracted.

As we have reported, William Armstead, who is retired from Penn, was working among other things on the effects of brain injury on piglets – experiments in which the animals were slaughtered. He has had seven papers retracted, and The Philadelphia Inquirer reported in September that he had left the university. Penn did not respond to several requests for comment when we attempted to reach officials there about Armstead’s work. 

According to the U.S. Office of Research Integrity, much of that work appears to have been suspect: 

Continue reading Former UPenn prof faked more than 50 figures, says government watchdog

‘Sad but necessary’: Ant researchers pull fossil paper over errant claim

An army ant, via https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dorylus#/media/File:Dorylus_gribodoi_casent0172627_dorsal_1.jpg

A group of insectologists is receiving praise on social media for retracting a 2022 paper in which they claimed, erroneously, it turns out, to have discovered a novel ant fossil. 

The paper, “An Eocene army ant,” appeared in November in Biology Letters, a Royal Society title. The authors were led by Christine Sosiak, of the New Jersey Institute of Technology, in Newark. The paper has yet to be cited, according to Clarivate Analytics’ Web of Science.

According to Sosiak and her colleagues:

Continue reading ‘Sad but necessary’: Ant researchers pull fossil paper over errant claim

Here’s one article that won’t be making any top 50 papers list

Who doesn’t love a list? The 500 best rock songs of all time. The 100 tallest buildings on the planet. The 10 smartest dog breeds. The 14 silliest place-names on earth (with Middelfart, Denmark in the six-spot, you can only imagine the places you’ll go.)

In October, the Arthroscopy, Sports Medicine, and Rehabilitation tried – and failed – to publish its own ranking of important papers in the field. The article, “The Top 50 Articles on Knee Posterolateral Corner Injuries,” by a group at Tulane University in New Orleans, purported to give readers a run-down of the 50 most-cited papers on posterolateral corner injuries between 1976 and 2021.  

If you’re afraid of numbers, you might want to skip ahead. If not: Within the top 50 was a Top 10 list, capped by this 2009 review article, which, according to the authors, had garnered 205 citations – and amassed a citation density of 15.77 (citations divided by years in print) – since publication. 

Citation density, meet the dust. According to the retraction notice

Continue reading Here’s one article that won’t be making any top 50 papers list

Did David Hume retract 2 essays on immorality to avoid religious controversy?

David Hume via Wikimedia

We may never identify the earliest retracted paper. For the time being, this 1756 article about Benjamin Franklin is the earliest one in our database. And here might be a runner-up, of a sort, from a friend of Franklin’s the following year. 

David Hume is widely regarded as one of the most influential philosophers of his or any age. His writings on causality, reason, and empiricism, as well as his history of England, were considered masterpieces when they appeared in the 18th century. 

In 1757, Hume published a collection of previously released works under the title “Four Dissertations,” which helped – if that’s the right word – cement his reputation as one of the age’s leading skeptics about religion. 

Continue reading Did David Hume retract 2 essays on immorality to avoid religious controversy?

Paper on writing centers as ‘neocolonial tools’ is retracted

Are academic writing centers agents of US hegemony, spreading the evils of colonialism as they work to topple rogue syntax and rehabilitate failing grammatical states?  

So argued a pair of authors in Canada in a now-retracted 2022 article which claimed that such centers have been used as “neocolonial tools” to push American foreign policy goals. 

But according to critics, that claim –  which seems like it might have emerged from a cross between Don DeLillo’s “White Noise” and Graham Greene’s, well, lots of his books – suffered from a fatal flaw or two, as we’ll shortly see. 

Continue reading Paper on writing centers as ‘neocolonial tools’ is retracted

Meet the publisher making the science of Brontë, Faulkner, and Whitman available for the first time

Charlotte Bronte, via Wikimedia

Waves have a higher energy thickness contrasted with other sustainable power sources, so it requires less space to create a similar measure of energy. The upside of these waves is that they convey measures of dynamic energy and keep them all through the excursion from the focal point of the ocean to the ocean side. The dynamic energy of the ocean waves is tackled to mechanical works like power age …

Few scholars of the work of William Faulkner know that the winner of the 1949 Nobel Prize in Literature toyed with the above passage in early drafts of his 1936 novel, Absalom, Absalom!  

He went instead with the more memorable:

Continue reading Meet the publisher making the science of Brontë, Faulkner, and Whitman available for the first time

Contempt judgment in penile implant spat leads to retraction

The Penuma penile implant

The authors of a 2021 paper on a method of male enhancement have been forced to retract the paper after losing a legal battle over the technology.

At the heart (er, groin?) of the matter is a dispute over the ownership of a penile implant. According to court documents, James Elist, a urologist in Beverly Hills, Calif., developed the device, which he commercialized as Penuma for men who want a bit more than nature provided.  

Penuma received clearance from the US Food and Drug Administration in 2004, becoming the first such product to reach the market. (As Elist told GQ in 2016, the surgically-implanted devices come only in large sizes because “nobody wants a small.”)

Elist alleges in a lawsuit that in 2018, a urologist in Texas named Robert Cornell contacted him with questions about how to use the Penuma in practice – questions the California physician claims were really efforts at corporate espionage: 

Continue reading Contempt judgment in penile implant spat leads to retraction