A little more than a month after removing a highly criticized article that claimed the measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine increased the risk of autism in African American boys, Translational Neurodegeneration has officially retracted the paper.
Here’s the notice, dated yesterday: Continue reading Journal makes it official, retracting controversial autism-vaccine paper
The week at Retraction Watch featured yet another case of a researcher peer reviewing his own paper, and an odd defense of plagiarism. Here’s what was happening elsewhere:
Continue reading Weekend reads: How’d my name end up on that paper?; Bob Dylan in the scientific literature
Despite the claims of a widely circulated news report today, The Lancet has no plans to retract a controversial open letter to the people of Gaza that has drawn criticism since being published in August.
The Jewish Telegraphic Agency (JTA) reported this morning: Continue reading Contrary to reports, Lancet not retracting controversial letter to people of Gaza
Nature, as we and others have noticed, has had what Paul Knoepfler referred to as a “torrent” of retractions in the past two years. That torrent — 13 research papers — has prompted a welcome and soul-searching editorial, as it did in 2010 when the journal had what it called an “unusually large number” of 4.
As the editors write this week in “Retraction challenges:” Continue reading Nature, facing “considerable rise” in retractions, blames lawyers for opaque and delayed notices
Here’s another installment of PubPeer Selections:
Continue reading PubPeer Selections: Sniffing at a dog poop paper; how grants should be distributed
The authors of a paper retracted for plagiarism of a popular website have decided not to take the charges — which they don’t contest — lying down.
Here’s the notice for “Alcohol consumption and hormonal alterations related to muscle hypertrophy: a review,” which appeared in Nutrition & Metabolism, a BioMed Central title: Continue reading Author of alcohol paper retracted for plagiarism defends copy-and-paste strategy
Although it shocks some observers every time, we’ve reported on the retractions of more than 100 papers pulled because authors managed to do their own peer review.
Apparently, it’s happened again.
Here’s a retraction notice in BMC Systems Biology for “Predicting new molecular targets for rhein using network pharmacology,” by Aihua Zhang, Hui Sun, Bo Yang and Xijun Wang:
Continue reading It’s happened again: Researcher appears to have peer reviewed his own paper
This week at Retraction Watch featured revelations about legal threats to PubPeer, and a swift expression of concern for a paper denying the link between HIV and AIDS. Here’s what was happening elsewhere: Continue reading Weekend reads: A journal that will publish anything, even fake; Wakefield loses defamation suit appeal
The publisher Frontiers has issued a Statement of Concern about a paper denying that HIV causes AIDS, and has launched an investigation into how the paper was published in the first place.
The paper, “Questioning the HIV-AIDS hypothesis: 30 years of dissent,” is written by Patricia Goodson of Texas A&M University and was published on September 23 in Frontiers in Public Health. As Tara Smith, who blogged about the paper yesterday, notes: Continue reading Publisher issues statement of concern about HIV denial paper, launches investigation
A late researcher in Italy who has already been blamed for image manipulation in a PLOS ONE retraction notice has had two more papers retracted, both from Free Radical Biology and Medicine.
Here’s the notice for 2007’s “Redox regulation of 7-ketocholesterol-induced apoptosis by β-carotene in human macrophages,” by Paola Palozza and colleagues: Continue reading Deceased researcher has two more papers retracted