Widely cited COVID-19-masks paper under scrutiny for inaccurate stat

You probably read a story or heard a news report over the past few days saying that if nearly all Americans wore masks to prevent COVID-19 spread, 130,000 lives could be saved by the end of February. That’s what a paper published on Friday says.

But it turns out that figure sounds twice as good as reality. Here’s the story:

On October 6, a group at the Institute for Health Metrics Evaluation (IHME) — a frequently cited source of COVID-19 data — submitted a manuscript to Nature Medicine. The paper was accepted on October 13, and published on October 23. It concluded:

Continue reading Widely cited COVID-19-masks paper under scrutiny for inaccurate stat

Weekend reads: The researcher who publishes a paper every two days; “are publishers learning from their mistakes?”; overcoming COVID-19 misinformation

Before we present this week’s Weekend Reads, a question: Do you enjoy our weekly roundup? If so, we could really use your help. Would you consider a tax-deductible donation to support Weekend Reads, and our daily work? Thanks in advance.

The week at Retraction Watch featured:

Our list of retracted or withdrawn COVID-19 papers is up to 37.

Here’s what was happening elsewhere:

Continue reading Weekend reads: The researcher who publishes a paper every two days; “are publishers learning from their mistakes?”; overcoming COVID-19 misinformation

Weekend reads: How retracted work continues to spread; claims of PhD thesis plagiarism in the wine industry; Brexit and research integrity

Before we present this week’s Weekend Reads, a question: Do you enjoy our weekly roundup? If so, we could really use your help. Would you consider a tax-deductible donation to support Weekend Reads, and our daily work? Thanks in advance.

The week at Retraction Watch featured:

Our list of retracted or withdrawn COVID-19 papers is up to 36.

Here’s what was happening elsewhere:

Continue reading Weekend reads: How retracted work continues to spread; claims of PhD thesis plagiarism in the wine industry; Brexit and research integrity

Journal retracts paper claiming that group of Indigenous Americans were Black Africans

A journal has retracted a paper on the origins of a group of Indigenous Americans after readers said the basis of the paper was long discredited.

The paper, “Early pioneers of the americas: the role of the Olmecs in urban education and social studies curriculum,” was written by scholars at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte, including corresponding author Greg Wiggan, and researchers at Towson State University, and published on June 25, 2020, in the Urban Review

In a July 23 post on Medium, Kurly Tlapoyawa and Ruben A. Arellano “ask that the The Urban Review journal retract the article by Wiggan et al and discontinue its promotion of ‘Black Olmecs:’”

Continue reading Journal retracts paper claiming that group of Indigenous Americans were Black Africans

Weekend reads: A prominent journal goes wrong; medical journals and politics; a journal with an editorial board full of dead people

Before we present this week’s Weekend Reads, a question: Do you enjoy our weekly roundup? If so, we could really use your help. Would you consider a tax-deductible donation to support Weekend Reads, and our daily work? Thanks in advance.

The week at Retraction Watch featured:

Our list of retracted or withdrawn COVID-19 papers is up to 35.

Here’s what was happening elsewhere:

Continue reading Weekend reads: A prominent journal goes wrong; medical journals and politics; a journal with an editorial board full of dead people

Lawyer for researcher deposed in $112.5 million Duke case asks us to remove a post

We receive occasional demand letters from attorneys here at Retraction Watch. Perhaps the most memorable was one in 2013 from an attorney claiming to represent Bharat Aggarwal. That prompted Popehat’s Ken White to enlarge our vocabulary by using the word “bumptious” in a post about the letter.

To that library of letters we can now add one from Martin Weinstein, of Willkie Farr & Gallagher, on behalf of his client Monica Kraft, now of the University of Arizona and late of Duke University. Willkie Farr & Gallagher is “an elite international law firm of approximately 750 lawyers located in 12 offices in six countries.”

Duke, as Retraction Watch readers may recall, settled a False Claims Act case last year for $112.5 million following allegations about how various members of its Department of Medicine’s Pulmonary Division responded to alleged misconduct in the department beginning in 2013. As Duke acknowledged in a court filing, “Kraft was a Principal Investigator for some research projects conducted within the Pulmonary Division and was Division Chief from January 1, 2013 through September 30, 2014.”

The facts in the previous two paragraphs are, as best we can tell, all uncontested. That is also true of all of the facts in the Dec. 20, 2019 post that Weinstein requested we remove.

We cannot, unfortunately, say the same for Weinstein’s letter.

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].

Weekend reads: ‘Unicorn poo’ and other fraudulent COVID-19 treatments; disgraced researchers and drug company payouts; a fictional account of real fraud

Before we present this week’s Weekend Reads, a question: Do you enjoy our weekly roundup? If so, we could really use your help. Would you consider a tax-deductible donation to support Weekend Reads, and our daily work? Thanks in advance.

The week at Retraction Watch featured:

Our list of retracted or withdrawn COVID-19 papers is up to 33.

Here’s what was happening elsewhere:

Continue reading Weekend reads: ‘Unicorn poo’ and other fraudulent COVID-19 treatments; disgraced researchers and drug company payouts; a fictional account of real fraud

“This unfortunate situation”: Journal retracts bizarre paper about a black hole at the center of Earth

A black hole, not at the center of the Earth (via Wikimedia)

It was a paper that caught the attention — and bemusement — of Twitter:

And now it is no more, along with four more articles from the Open Access Macedonian Journal of Medical Sciences in what was billed as a special issue on Global Dermatology.

Here’s the whole title: “A black hole at the center of earth plays the role of the biggest system of telecommunication for connecting DNAs, dark DNAs and molecules of water on 4+N- dimensional manifold.” (Be warned that the link takes you to a login.)

You may fairly wonder what a terrestrial black hole and skin diseases have in common. The abstract, which we present for posterity, sheds no, ahem, light on the question:

Continue reading “This unfortunate situation”: Journal retracts bizarre paper about a black hole at the center of Earth

Major heart journal retracts two papers from Oxford group for misconduct

The Journal of the American College of Cardiology (JACC) has retracted two 2018 papers out of the University of Oxford because of misconduct.

Both retraction notices blame first author Alexander Liu, a student in the lab at the time, who disputes the retractions. The studies were part of a larger effort to improve heart imaging that caught the attention of cardiologists and was highlighted by Oxford in 2015.

Here’s the notice for “Diagnosis of Microvascular Angina Using Cardiac Magnetic Resonance,” a paper that has been cited 59 times, according to Clarivate Analytics’ Web of Science, earning it a “highly cited paper” designation:

Continue reading Major heart journal retracts two papers from Oxford group for misconduct

Weekend reads: Steak-umm in the scientific literature; hushed-up COVID-19 data; major award cancelled for 2020

Before we present this week’s Weekend Reads, a question: Do you enjoy our weekly roundup? If so, we could really use your help. Would you consider a tax-deductible donation to support Weekend Reads, and our daily work? Thanks in advance.

The week at Retraction Watch featured:

Our list of retracted or withdrawn COVID-19 papers is up to 33.

Here’s what was happening elsewhere:

Continue reading Weekend reads: Steak-umm in the scientific literature; hushed-up COVID-19 data; major award cancelled for 2020