A group of neonatal researchers in Caen has lost their 2013 review article in Archives of Disease in Childhood Fetal & Neonatal Edition for a variety of problems with their analysis of the data.
The article was titled “NIDCAP in preterm infants and the neurodevelopmental effect in the first 2 years,” and its first author was Laura Fazilleau of University Hospital Côte de Nacre.
According to the abstract: Continue reading Multiple data errors force retraction of paper about preemies
The debate over the retraction of a highly controversial paper on the effects of GMOs on rats continues unabated. This week, Adriane Fugh-Berman and Thomas Sherman wrote on the Hastings Center website that Continue reading Journal editor defends retraction of GMO-rats study while authors reveal some of paper’s history
Karel Bezouška, who, as we noted last year “broke into a lab refrigerator so he could tamper with samples being used to try to replicate the experiments during the investigation,” has had his fourth paper retracted.
Here’s the notice, for “Synthesis of Multivalent Glycoconjugates Containing the Immunoactive LELTE Peptide: Effect of Glycosylation on Cellular Activation and Natural Killing by Human Peripheral Blood Mononuclear Cells,” in the Journal of the American Chemical Society (JACS): Continue reading Karel Bezouška, who broke into lab to tamper with investigation, has JACS paper retracted
We have a follow-up from François-Xavier Coudert on the trial of two French odontology researchers accused of stealing from — and abetting the theft of — the work of a graduate student.
A French court has ruled that French dental researcher accused of plagiarizing the thesis of a fellow student was guilty of the charge, but that her husband was not complicit in the crime, according to accounts in the French media.
As we reported the other day, Christine Marchal-Sixou and her lab-head-turned-husband, Michel Sixou, had been on trial for plagiarism and complicity in the case.
The court’s sentence was surprisingly heavy and went beyond what the prosecution sought. Marchal-Sixou received a 5,000 euro fine and ordered to pay 20,000 euros in compensatory damages to the student, Samer Nuwwareh. Continue reading Stiff sentence for French researcher found guilty of plagiarizing
Authors should stick together, right?
A materials scientist in France has learned that lesson the hard way, having been forced to retract his 2012 paper in the Journal of Adhesion Science and Technology because he neglected to list any of his co-authors.
The paper, “A generalized cure model for one-part room temperature vulcanizing sealants and adhesives,” was written — ostensibly, at least — by François de Buyl, whose LinkedIn page says is a lighting engineer at Dow Corning Europe. (He worked as a materials scientist at Dow prior to that.) de Buyl is the sole author on the paper, which is why we’re reading the following notice from the journal: Continue reading None for all, as selfish co-author loses adhesion paper by cutting out colleagues
A group at the University of Texas Southwestern that retracted five papers last year has retracted one more, and has had a paper subjected to an Expression of Concern at the request of the school’s dean.
Here’s the retraction notice for “DNA methylation-associated inactivation of TGFβ-related genes, DRM/Gremlin, RUNX3, and HPP1 in human cancers,” originally published in the British Journal of Cancer and cited 51 times, according to Thomson Scientific’s Web of Knowledge:
Continue reading Cancer biology group notches sixth retraction, and earns an Expression of Concern
We’re always glad to have guest posts, and here’s one from François-Xavier Coudert, reporting from France.
As we reported the other day, a Nature editorial suggested that police involvement might be an appropriate response to research misconduct. The French seem to agree, based on reports in the media there, as Coudert writes:
A husband-wife team of French odontology researchers at l’université Paul-Sabatier in Toulouse have been on trial in that country for research misconduct. Christine Marchal-Sixou, an associate professor, faces a charge of plagiarism, and Michel Sixou, full professor and dean of the faculty of dental medicine until September, has been charged with complicity. Continue reading France tries husband-wife team for research misconduct in plagiarism case
A rheumatology researcher in France is retracting a paper for errors in several sentences.
Here’s the retraction notice for “Odanacatib for the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis, a paper originally published in October in Expert Opinion on Pharmacotherapy:
Unfortunately, due to an honest error from the author, a small portion of this otherwise reliable published article contains clinically inaccurate data. The publisher and author agree to retract the paper pending correction.
The author of the paper, Roland Chapurlat, tells us: Continue reading A “small portion of this otherwise reliable published article contains clinically inaccurate data”
A heavily criticized study of the effects of genetically modified maize and the Roundup herbicide on rats is being retracted — one way or another.
The paper — by Gilles Seralini and colleagues — was published in Food and Chemical Toxicology last year. There have been calls for retraction since then, along with other criticism and a lengthy exchange of letters in the journal. Meanwhile, the paper has been cited 28 times, according to Thomson Scientific’s Web of Knowledge, and the French National Assembly (their lower house of Parliament) held a long hearing on the paper last year, with Seralini and other scientists testifying.
Now, as reported in the French media, the editor of the journal, A. Wallace Hayes, has sent Seralini a letter saying that the paper will be retracted if Seralini does not agree to withdraw it.
Here’s most of the November 19 letter, including Hayes’ proposed retraction notice: Continue reading Controversial Seralini GMO-rats paper to be retracted
Last week, we reported that some of the authors of a 2010 paper in the BMJ claiming to have identified Henry IV’s head thought the study should be retracted based on new evidence. Some of the other authors have now responded to that call for retraction, which appeared on the BMJ’s site alongside the paper.
Philippe Charlier, the corresponding author of the original paper, and five of the original paper’s 15 co-authors conclude after reviewing the evidence that