The week at Retraction Watch featured the heartfelt response of a researcher when she found out a paper she’d reviewed had been retracted, and a new member of our leaderboard. Here’s what was happening elsewhere: Continue reading Weekend reads: Pseudoscience in the literature; a world without journals; “invisible and abandoned” trials
Author: Ivan Oransky
Weekend reads: Fake news in science; how not to stress about science; another hilarious sting
The final week of 2016 at Retraction Watch featured the retraction of a high-profile paper on diabetes from Harvard, and the retraction of a JAMA article on whether zinc was useful for the common cold. Here’s what was happening elsewhere: Continue reading Weekend reads: Fake news in science; how not to stress about science; another hilarious sting
The Retraction Watch 2016 year in review — and a sneak peek at our database
It’s been another exciting year for us at Retraction Watch. As always, there has been more to cover than we have time for. At the same time, we’ve expanded our efforts in other media, telling bigger stories and offering more analysis. And we’ve made major progress on our database — more on that in a moment.
A sampling of what happened this year: Continue reading The Retraction Watch 2016 year in review — and a sneak peek at our database
We removed a post temporarily. It’s back. Here’s why.
On December 15, we removed a post from view as a result of a law that some have misused to have content removed from the web. Today, we have reinstated that post.
Here’s what the post about, if you’re curious: Continue reading We removed a post temporarily. It’s back. Here’s why.
JAMA article on zinc for the common cold retracted
Authors have retracted a JAMA article summarizing the evidence behind the benefits of a supplement, after the systemic review upon which it was based was withdrawn.
The 2014 paper, “Oral Zinc for the Common Cold,” drew from a 2013 Cochrane Review, considered the gold standard for rigorous analyses of clinical treatments. That Cochrane review was withdrawn last year, a decision that the editors upheld this past September. Both were co-authored by Rashmi Ranjan Das, of the All India Institute of Medical Sciences, in Bhubaneswar, and Meenu Singh, of the Post-Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, in Chandigarh, India.
JAMA editor in chief Howard Bauchner told Retraction Watch that this week’s retraction followed an investigation by the journal: Continue reading JAMA article on zinc for the common cold retracted
Lack of reproducibility triggers retractions of Nature Materials articles
The authors of a highly cited 2015 paper in Nature Materials have retracted it, after being unable to reproduce some of the key findings.
The move prompted the journal to also retract an associated News & Views article.
Here’s the retraction notice for “Fast and long-range triplet exciton diffusion in metal–organic frameworks for photon upconversion at ultralow excitation power:” Continue reading Lack of reproducibility triggers retractions of Nature Materials articles
Weekend reads: The year’s top retractions; quoting Trump leads to a firing; life without Elsevier journals
This week at Retraction Watch featured revelations about a frequent co-author of the world’s retraction record holder, and a prison term for fraud. Here’s what was happening elsewhere: Continue reading Weekend reads: The year’s top retractions; quoting Trump leads to a firing; life without Elsevier journals
Weekend reads: One of the most highly cited papers ever; a pharma buys peer-reviewed praise; how to get more citations
The week at Retraction Watch featured revelations about a cancer researcher in Canada and an author’s worst nightmare come true. Here’s what was happening elsewhere: Continue reading Weekend reads: One of the most highly cited papers ever; a pharma buys peer-reviewed praise; how to get more citations
We’ve temporarily removed a Retraction Watch post. Here’s why. (Hint: A bad law.)
Longtime Retraction Watch readers may recall that in 2013, we were forced to temporarily remove ten posts following a false — and frankly ridiculous — copyright infringement claim.
Well, it’s happened again.
On Wednesday, our host, Bluehost, forwarded us another false copyright claim — aka a Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) takedown notice — by someone calling himself “Jiya Khan” and claiming to be based in Delhi, India. (Well, specifically, in “Rohini,sector-12,” which would mean that he or she is based at one of two petrol stations.)
Khan insisted under penalty of perjury that a December 2014 post of ours — which we have now temporarily removed from public view (more on that in a moment) — violated his or her copyright.
What actually happened, in an eerie echo of the 2013 case, is that Continue reading We’ve temporarily removed a Retraction Watch post. Here’s why. (Hint: A bad law.)
Dopey dupe retractions: How publisher error hurts researchers
Not all retractions result from researchers’ mistakes — we have an entire category of posts known as “publisher errors,” in which publishers mistakenly post a paper, through no fault of the authors. Yet, those retractions can become a black mark on authors’ record. Our co-founder Ivan Oransky and Adam Etkin, Executive Editor at Springer Publishing Co (unrelated to Springer Nature) propose a new system in the latest issue of the International Society of Managing & Technical Editors newsletter, reprinted with permission below.
Imagine you’re a researcher who is one of 10 candidates being considered for tenure, or a promotion, or perhaps a new job which would significantly advance your career. Now imagine that those making this decision eliminate you as a candidate without even an interview because your record shows you’ve had a paper retracted. But in this particular case, what the decision makers may not be aware of is that the paper was not retracted because you made an honest mistake—which, if you came forward about it, really shouldn’t be a black mark anyway—or even because you did something unethical. It was retracted due to publisher error. Like Han Solo and/or Lando Calrissian, you’d find yourself in utter disbelief while saying “It’s not my fault!”— and you’d be right. Continue reading Dopey dupe retractions: How publisher error hurts researchers