Leto Sapunar

Journal temporarily withdraws COVID-19 “labor cage” study

A study whose title suggested an “effective” way to give birth during the coronavirus pandemic has been temporarily retracted because the publisher says the word “effective” was included in the title by accident.

The method (pictured above) involved an enclosed, transparent chamber walling off the mother’s upper half from the rest of the world. It wasn’t very well received, according to an Essential Baby article that cited Twitter users referring to the “delivery table shield” as a “labor cage” and “greenhouse.”

The study, called “An effective protective equipment to use in the vaginal delivery of the pregnant women with suspected/diagnosed COVID-19: Delivery Table Shield” was published in the American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology (AJOG), an Elsevier journal, on June 15. Most of the authors were affiliated with the Turkish Ministry of Health at Ankara City Hospital.

But it was swiftly removed. The temporary retraction notice says:

Consumer research study is retracted for unexplained anomalies

A study looking at how consumers relate to “social-benefit” brands has been retracted after several of its authors notified the journal that the data, provided and analyzed by a different author, had irregularities that couldn’t be explained.

“Connections to Brands that Help Others versus Help the Self: The Impact of Incidental Awe and Pride on Consumer Relationships with Social-Benefit and Luxury Brands” was published in the Journal of the Association for Consumer Research of The University of Chicago Press.

The abstract reads:

“Honest errors happen in science:” JAMA journal retracts paper on antidepressants

A review of scores of studies on antidepressants has been retracted because it used an incorrect analysis.

The original paper, published in JAMA Psychiatry on February 19, 2020, looked at individual differences in patients taking antidepressants and concluded that there were significant differences beyond the placebo effect or the data’s statistical noise. The paper earned some attention, including a story on MedPage Today.

However, the analysis didn’t hold up to scrutiny. The retraction notice reads:

Elsevier journal to retract 2012 paper widely derided as racist

An article claiming that skin pigmentation is related to aggression and sexuality in humans will be retracted, Elsevier announced today.

The study, “Do pigmentation and the melanocortin system modulate aggression and sexuality in humans as they do in other animals?” was published online in Personality and Individual Differences, an Elsevier journal, on March 15, 2012.

The study’s authors, John Rushton and Donald Templer, both deceased, hypothesized that skin color was related to aggression and sexuality in humans. It has been cited just nine times in eight years, according to Clarivate Analytics’ Web of Science.

Part of the abstract says:

‘How I got fooled’: The story behind the retraction of a study of gamers

In April of this year, Corneel Vandelanotte realized something had gone wrong with a paper he had recently published.

First, there was a post about his paper by Nick Brown, a scientific sleuth, questioning the results, ethics, and authors behind the work. That was followed by a comment on PubPeer by Elisabeth Bik, another scientific sleuth.

“People started alerting me,” Vandelanotte, a public health researcher at Central Queensland University in Rockhampton, told Retraction Watch. “Hey, have you seen this blog by Nick Brown? And, and then yeah, okay, that was a bad day. Let me put it that way.”

A nursing journal makes two online critiques disappear

A series of back and forth publications about a 12-year-old study of nursing education ended with some unusual editorial decisions.

Darrell Spurlock, a professor of nursing at Widener University and director of the university’s Leadership Center for Nursing Education Research, co-authored a study of the Health Education Systems, Inc. (HESI) nursing test in 2008. He and his colleague found that the test was a poor predictor of failure on the National Counsel Licensure Exam (NCLEX-RN).

More than a decade later, a critique of the paper, by Dreher et al., appeared out of the blue, published last year in Nursing Forum, a Wiley journal. Spurlock takes issue with the way his research was portrayed in the critique, which paints a more positive picture of the HESI test.

University recommends retraction of two computing papers for plagiarism

Edith Cowan University, Joondalup, via Wikimedia

Following an investigation prompted by a whistleblower, a university in Australia has recommended that one of its researchers retract two papers, Retraction Watch has learned.

The reviews, “Cryptography and State-of-the-art Techniques” and “An Advanced Survey on Cloud Computing and State-of-the-art Research Issues,” were both published in 2012 in the International Journal of Computer Science Issues (IJCSI). In a May 20 letter to the whistleblower in the case, the research integrity officer at Edith Cowan University in Perth wrote:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this: