August 3rd has rolled around again, which means it’s time to celebrate another Retraction Watch anniversary — this time, our sixth.
It’s been an exciting year. Some highlights: Continue reading Happy sixth anniversary, Retraction Watch! Here’s to a new partnership with Science
A research fellow at Harvard Medical School whose PhD was revoked last month is no longer working in his former lab, Retraction Watch has learned.
An archived version of the lab site for Alfred Goldberg from December, 2015, lists Sudarsanareddy Lokireddy as a postdoctoral fellow; however, Goldberg’s current lab site doesn’t include Lokireddy as a lab member.
We contacted Goldberg’s lab, and he was unavailable for comment. We were told all of his lab members are on the current website.
Lokireddy has also logged his sixth retraction. But this case isn’t as straightforward as it seems.
Continue reading Researcher whose PhD was revoked is no longer at Harvard lab
A medical journal in Romania has issued a lifetime ban for a researcher after retracting four of his papers.
Since April, the Romanian Journal of Internal Medicine (RJIM) retracted nine papers (eight for plagiarism, one for duplication); four of these were co-authored by Manole Cojocaru, a researcher at the Titu Maiorescu University (TMU) in Bucharest, Romania. Subsequently, the journal has banned Cojocaru from submitting manuscripts, and has also informed the ethics committee at his institution.
Here’s the retraction notice, which is the same for six of the papers: Continue reading Romanian journal bans author following 4 retractions
Science is considering adding an expression of concern (EOC) to a June paper that caught the media’s attention for showing how human pollution may be harming fish, following allegations of research misconduct.
A group of researchers allege the paper — which suggested fish larvae are eating small particles of plastic rather than their natural prey — contains missing data and used a problematic methodology. After the researchers submitted a formal letter (available here), Uppsala University in Sweden is now conducting an inquiry, the first step in determining whether to launch a formal investigation.
A spokesperson from Science told Retraction Watch that once the journal independently verifies that an investigation is underway, it will issue an EOC for the paper: Continue reading High-profile Science paper on fish and plastics may earn notice of concern
A journal has retracted a paper for a somewhat unusual reason — and swapped the article with an entirely new paper by different authors.
The journal, Materia Socio-Medica, said it’s retracting a paper about diet in dialysis patients because of some of the authors “un-ethical behaviors” in previous issues of the journal. In its place, the journal has published a paper about tuberculosis, also a curious move.
Here’s the retraction notice for “Effect of Diet Education on Blood Pressure Changes and Interdialytic Weight in Hemodialysis Patients Admitted in Hajar Hospital in Shahrekord:” Continue reading Journal retracts nutrition paper, citing authors’ “unethical behavior”
A researcher whose work has been subject to three retractions and two expressions of concern has settled a lawsuit he filed against his university for breach of contract and emotional distress.
Rakesh Kumar had sued George Washington University for $8 million, claiming that his employer had relieved him of department chair duties without following the correct procedure, following a finding of misconduct in his lab. He also claimed that the university had either leaked confidential information about an investigation into his work, or at least failed to keep that information from being posted in a comment here on Retraction Watch.
Last year, the university filed a motion to dismiss the case, but in March, a judge allowed some of it to go forward. On Thursday, the parties settled the case.
We asked Kumar’s attorney, Paul Thaler, to describe the terms of the settlement and say whether Kumar would remain employed at George Washington: Continue reading Scientist with three retractions settles lawsuit against George Washington University
A biotechnology journal has retracted a 14-year-old review after an investigation concluded that the authors had plagiarized from numerous sources.
The last author of the paper — which has been cited 289 times, according to Thomson Reuters Web of Science — told us the authors took a few lines from other reviews, and unintentionally left off the references.
In June 2011, the same author was denied a prestigious fellowship after an anonymous plagiarism allegation was filed against him.
Here’s the retraction notice in Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology for “The nitrile-degrading enzymes: current status and future prospects:” Continue reading Biotech journal pulls well-cited review that plagiarized from several sources
The week at Retraction Watch featured a PhD student expelled for submitting a paper without her co-authors’ permission, and a look at the six types of peer reviewers. Here’s what was happening elsewhere: Continue reading Weekend reads: What lurks in clinical trial databases; plagiarism by Russian ministers; why journals shy away from fraud allegations
A journal has retracted a paper about augmented reality that it termed “problematic,” as it copied large sections from another paper.
The International Journal of Science and Research (IJSR) is on librarian Jeffrey Beall’s list of “potential, possible, or probable predatory” scholarly journals — which rarely issue retractions, Beall told us.
Contrary to the retraction guidelines published by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), IJSR has removed the paper entirely from its website, and asked readers to report any additional copies so they can be removed, as well.
Here’s the retraction notice entitled, “Letter of Apology and Retraction:” Continue reading Journal pulls paper — entirely (we can’t find it anymore)
PLOS ONE has issued an expression of concern (EOC) for a 2014 math paper after readers raised concerns with its algorithm.
According to the first author of the paper — Hafsa Athar Jafree from the University of Karachi in Pakistan — none of the authors agreed to the EOC notice. She told us the paper contains a few typos, which may have made it unclear to some readers, but said the authors had provided all of the necessary information to “justify the presented algorithms.”
A PLOS ONE spokesperson told us the journal decided to issue an EOC after consulting the editorial board, which raised significant concerns about the study.
In 2014, the journal issued a correction to the study to fix several equations in the original article.
Here’s the EOC, posted July 25: Continue reading PLOS ONE flags math paper over algorithm concerns