Ivan Oransky

23 becomes 22: Publisher retracts retraction, apologizes for the error

A publisher that retracted nearly two dozen papers earlier this month for plagiarism and other problems has retracted one of the retractions, apologizing to the authors for its error.

All of the 23 — now 22 — retracted papers had either Jesus Silva or Amelec Viloria as one of the authors, but Silva and Viloria turn out to be the same person, according to the publisher, IOP Publishing. Viloria is last author of the now unretracted paper, “Energy potential of vinasse derived from rum manufacturing,” from IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering.

The first author of that paper, Carmen Vásquez, of Universidad Nacional Experimental Politécnica Antonio José de Sucre in Venezuela, told Retraction Watch by email (we used Google Translate to translate from Spanish to English) that she had contacted the publisher when the retractions appeared to let them know that her paper did not plagiarize:

Exclusive: University of Arizona says former researcher committed misconduct by plagiarizing figure

A former researcher in the University of Arizona’s optics school engaged in “a serious case of research misconduct,” Retraction Watch has learned.

Palash Gangopadhyay, who until 2019 was a research scientist at Arizona, used a figure from a 2003 paper by other authors when he co-authored a 2018 paper in Optics Letters titled “High sensitivity magnetometer using nanocomposite polymers with large magneto-optic response,” Wyant College of Optical Sciences dean Thomas Koch wrote to colleagues in an email obtained by Retraction Watch. The 2003 paper appeared in an obstetrics journal.

The 2018 paper has been cited nine times, according to Clarivate Analytics’ Web of Science.

Koch wrote:

Weekend reads: Retracting racist and sexist work; The Lancet learns from a retraction; Trump administration interferes with publications

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:

The retraction of 23 papers, and block of 35 more, for a fake alias and plagiarism
A Springer Nature journal that took eight months to retract a paper after a government misconduct finding
The retraction of a paper claiming women with endometriosis were more attractive

Our list of retracted or withdrawn COVID-19 papers is up to 33.

Here’s what was happening elsewhere:

Weekend reads: Questions about Russian COVID-19 vaccine data; a p-value pledge; why one author removed her name from a paper

The week at Retraction Watch featured:

An Elsevier book chapter that claims COVID-19 came from space;
An Elsevier journal that shares concerns about a ‘transparently ridiculous’ genetics paper
A paper retracted because the references didn’t say what the authors said they did — and because the authors couldn’t come up with the underlying data
An investigation by Arizona State into two of its former neuroscience researchers

Our list of retracted or withdrawn COVID-19 papers is up to 32.

Here’s what was happening elsewhere:

Weekend reads: A pay-for-peer review movement; toxic PIs; why plagiarism is not a victimless crime

The week at Retraction Watch featured:

A poultry researcher who’s up to 14 retractions
A swift expression of concern in Science
A researcher who objected to being left off a list of bogus co-authors
An update on a professor’s legal threats against us

Our list of retracted or withdrawn COVID-19 papers is up to 32.

Here’s what was happening elsewhere:

Weekend reads: A plagiarizing priest; a journal of trial and error; disappearing journals

The week at Retraction Watch featured:

Why you shouldn’t try to republish a paper you had retracted for plagiarism
A Duke engineering professor who had seven papers corrected for failure to disclose a significant conflict of interest
Continuing investigation into a paper claiming to link obesity and dishonesty
A retraction and corrections for a high-profile education researcher

Our list of retracted or withdrawn COVID-19 papers is up to 32.

Here’s what was happening elsewhere:

Major indexing service rejects appeals by two suppressed journals

Journals hoping that Clarivate Analytics — the company behind the Impact Factor — would reverse their decision to suppress their titles from the closely watched metric are batting .500.

In July, as we reported, Clarivate suppressed 33 journals from its Journal Citation Reports (JCR), which means they will not have a 2019 Impact Factor, because of what Clarivate said was excessive self-citation. As affected journals have noted, suppression from the list can have a major impact on journals and researchers, many of whom are judged based on where they publish, using Impact Factor as a key metric.

Two journals — Zootaxa and the International Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiology — successfully appealed the decision, and have been reinstated in the 2019 JCR. But appeals by two others — Body Image and Forensic Science International: Genetics (FSIGEN) — have been denied, Retraction Watch has learned.

Between August 18 and August 26, nearly 500 forensic scientists from 49 countries signed a petition objecting to Clarivate’s move, according to Ulises Toscanini, director of the Laboratory PRICAI-Fundación Favaloro and a professor at Favaloro University in Buenos Aires. Toscanini, president of the executive committee of the Spanish and Portuguese Speaking Working Group of the International Society for Forensic Genetics, said FSIGEN “is a ‘niche’ journal,” and is “broadly recognized as the top journal of the area.” He continued:

Weekend reads: Editors who publish in their own journals; a crackdown on paper mills; oncologist violates university policies in developing treatment

The week at Retraction Watch featured:

A sting involving hydroxychloroquine, push scooters, and COVID-19
A home for complaints about retractions of homeopathy papers
A spider researcher using legal threats and public records requests to prevent retractions of his work

Our list of retracted or withdrawn COVID-19 papers is up to 32.

Here’s what was happening elsewhere:

Weekend reads: The fate of fraudsters; TV doctors sting a predatory journal; best paper title ever?

The week at Retraction Watch featured:

A whistleblower’s allegations about hundreds of dodgy papers from four groups
The retraction of 20 book reviews by a PhD student for plagiarism
The retraction of a highly cited Science paper
A professor’s departure after retractions for data anomalies
A ban on federal US funding for a researcher who has received more than $17 million in grants

Our list of retracted or withdrawn COVID-19 papers is up to 31.

Here’s what was happening elsewhere:

Former Maryland researcher banned from Federal funding for misconduct

At least seven years after questions were first raised about work by a researcher at the University of Maryland Baltimore, School of Medicine, he has agreed to a three-year ban on Federal funding.

Anil Jaiswal, whose first retraction appeared in 2013, faked data in eight NIH grant applications and six papers supported by Federal grants, according to a new finding by the Office of Research Integrity (ORI). Jaiswal, the ORI said,

intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly: (a) used random blank background sections of film or empty boxes to falsely represent or fabricate western blot analyses; (b) used manipulated images to generate and report falsified data in figures; and (c) used mislabeled images to falsely report data in figures.

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this: