Over the past few days, we’ve noticed a spike in traffic — sometimes so large that it crashes our site — to older posts about Judy Mikovits. It appears that Mikovits is once again in the news. Here’s a story from Vice that provides some context:
Continue reading Who is Judy Mikovits?
Talk about the publish-or-perish version of the circle of life.
A Springer Nature journal has retracted 33 articles — 29 from one special issue, and four from another — for a laundry list of publishing sins, from fake peer review to plagiarism to stealing unpublished manuscripts.
And an Elsevier journal has retracted ten papers recently for duplication — of ten of the Springer Nature journal’s papers.
A typical notice from the Springer Nature journal, Multimedia Tools and Applications (MTAP):
Continue reading The circle of life, publish or perish edition: Two journals retract more than 40 papers
We know there are a lot of causes that matter to you, but since you’re reading this, we may be one of them. So we’d like to ask for your support.
On this Giving Tuesday Now, please consider making a tax-deductible contribution to The Center For Scientific Integrity, the 501(c)3 parent organization of Retraction Watch. Any amount helps. Your donation will help us shine a spotlight on scientific misconduct, and on the process — too often messy and slow — of correcting the scholarly record.
Here’s what your donations will continue to help make possible:
Continue reading This Giving Tuesday Now, please consider supporting Retraction Watch
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.
Sending thoughts to our readers and wishing them the best in this uncertain time.
The week at Retraction Watch featured:
How many papers about COVID-19 have been retracted? We’ve been keeping track, as part of our database. Here’s our frequently updated list.
Here’s what was happening elsewhere:
Continue reading Weekend reads: Retracted COVID-19 papers; a coronavirus study kept under wraps; Harvard and Jeffrey Epstein
Carlo Croce, the prolific cancer researcher at The Ohio State University (OSU) with a penchant for hiring — and then losing — lawyers to sue those who displease him, has lost an 10th paper to retraction.
Croce, who in addition to the 10 retractions also has three expressions of concern and 18 corrections for his work, unsuccessfully sued the New York Times for defamation after the newspaper reported on misconduct allegations against him. He has also sued OSU — also unsuccessfully — to force them to restore him as chair of the Department of Cancer Biology and Genetics.
Apparently, Croce and his co-author thought that a correction to the newly retracted article was necessary because of “improper reuse of text from previous articles.” The journal, however, felt differently.
Continue reading Litigious OSU cancer researcher earns his 10th retraction
More than two years after being made aware of undisclosed conflicts of interest by a Minnesota physician who ran afoul of the U.S. FDA for health claims about supplements sold by his company, a publisher has added expressions of concern on 20 of the doctor’s papers.
As we reported in August 2019, on Feb. 23, 2018, Stephen Barrett — a U.S. physician and founder of Quackwatch — sent Dove Press a message about the 20 papers by Marty Hinz:
Continue reading Publisher slaps expressions of concern on 20 papers by nutrition supplement-selling doctor
A March paper by researchers at Imperial College London that, in the words of the Washington Post, “helped upend U.S. and U.K. coronavirus strategies,” cited a preprint that had been withdrawn.
Retraction Watch became aware of the issue after being contacted by a PubPeer commenter who had noted the withdrawal earlier this month. Following questions from Retraction Watch this weekend, the authors said they plan to submit a correction.
In March, the New York Times wrote:
Continue reading Authors to correct influential Imperial College COVID-19 report after learning it cited a withdrawn preprintBefore 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.
Sending thoughts to our readers and wishing them the best in this uncertain time.
The week at Retraction Watch featured:
Here’s what was happening elsewhere:
Continue reading Weekend reads: The promise and peril of speedy coronavirus research; a JAMA retraction; Google Scholar indexes a lunch menu
How long should a retraction take?
As Retraction Watch readers may recall, that’s a question we ask often. In 2018, for example, we wrote a post noting that nearly two years after the University of Maryland, Baltimore, had requested retractions, the journals had done nothing. Some of the papers have since been retracted.
We have occasion to ask the question again, about a different case at the University of Maryland.
Continue reading A year after a university asked two Elsevier journals to retract papers, they haven’tBefore 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.
Sending thoughts to our readers and wishing them the best in this uncertain time.
The week at Retraction Watch featured:
Here’s what was happening elsewhere:
Continue reading Weekend reads: The effects of coronavirus on the literature; a sting involving Big Bird; a made-up name appears in a medical journal