Category: italy retractions

Retracted Seralini GMO-rat study republished

env sci europeA highly controversial — and retracted — 2012 study by Gilles Seralini and colleagues of the effects of genetically modified maize and the Roundup herbicide on rats has been republished.

Retraction Watch readers may recall that the editor of Food and Chemical Toxicology decided to retract the heavily criticized paper because it was “inconclusive.” The editor, A. Wallace Hayes, claimed that this was consistent with Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines, although we and many others disagreed.

Here’s the original abstract of the Food and Chemical Toxicology paper, which has been cited 55 times, according to Thomson Scientific’s Web of Knowledge: Continue reading Retracted Seralini GMO-rat study republished

Cancer genetics group retracts three papers for “inappropriate presentation of data”

jbc 620A group of cancer genetics researchers in Italy and the U.S. has retracted three papers in the Journal of Biological Chemistry (JBC) after it became aware they had duplicated some bands in their figures.

Here are the three papers: Continue reading Cancer genetics group retracts three papers for “inappropriate presentation of data”

Retraction of letter alleging sock puppetry now cites “legal reasons”

jasistEarlier this month, we brought you the story of a retraction from the Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology involving rivalry and alleged sock puppetry. The author of the now-retracted letter, physicist Lorenzo Iorio, claimed that another researcher was using fake names to criticize his work on arXiv.At the time, the editor of the journal had told everyone concerned that the letter would be retracted, but the retraction notice hadn’t yet appeared. Now it has.

Here’s the notice: Continue reading Retraction of letter alleging sock puppetry now cites “legal reasons”

JCI retracts 10-year-old cancer study because figures were “intentionally mislabeled”

jci june 14The Journal of Clinical Investigation is retracting a 2004 paper by a cancer researchers from Italy because of “evident misrepresentation of data and image duplication.”

Here’s the notice for “The IL-12Rβ2 gene functions as a tumor suppressor in human B cell malignancies:” Continue reading JCI retracts 10-year-old cancer study because figures were “intentionally mislabeled”

Journal retracts letter accusing physicist of using fake names to criticize papers

jasistFrom the world of physics, we have a retraction involving rivalry and alleged sock puppetry. The Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology has removed a letter from its website after a scientist complained that it was making unproven allegations against him.

It’s a head-scratching case. The letter, from Lorenzo Iorio, first appeared in the journal on April 28. Here’s how Neuroskeptic describes the background: Continue reading Journal retracts letter accusing physicist of using fake names to criticize papers

Which countries have the most retractions, for which reasons?

jmlaOne of the questions we often get — but are careful to answer with some version of “we don’t know because we don’t have a denominator” — is how retraction rates vary by scientific field and country. We’ve noticed that the reasons for retraction seem to vary among countries, but didn’t really have the data. A new paper in the Journal of the Medical Library Association by Kathleen Amos takes a good step toward figuring the country part out.

Amos looked at PubMed-indexed retractions from 2008 to 2012. Here’s what she found: Continue reading Which countries have the most retractions, for which reasons?

Near “word-to-word” similarities topple microflora paper

matfetneonatThe Journal of Maternal-Fetal & Neonatal Medicine has retracted a 2012 paper by a group of pediatric gut researchers in Naples, Italy, who seemed to have had a visceral reaction to using their own words.

The paper, “Composition and roles of intestinal microbiota in children,” sought to

provide an update of the advantages of new-generation molecular diagnostics to study the diversity of intestinal microflora and to evaluate its alteration in human diseases.

The paper has been cited five times, according to Thomson Scientific’s Web of Knowledge. Here’s the retraction notice: Continue reading Near “word-to-word” similarities topple microflora paper

Dubai-ous: Journal yanks surgery paper for consent, data issues

Low-Res-Annals-95_4-Cover-1_smallThe Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England has retracted a 2013 article by a group from Dubai and Italy after learning of serious issues with the data in the report.

The article, “Transanal haemorrhoidal dearterialisation with mucopexy versus stapler haemorrhoidopexy: a randomised trial with long term follow-up,” purportedly described a long-term telephone follow-up study of patients who had undergone the procedure. Here’s the abstract: Continue reading Dubai-ous: Journal yanks surgery paper for consent, data issues

Plagiarism (and plenty of it) fells Crohn’s paper

jcpcover414A group of researchers from Italy has lost their 2010 paper in the Journal of Cellular Physiology for having plagiarized — in style.

The article, “Early Years of Biological Agents Therapy in Crohn’s Disease and Risk of the Human Polyomavirus JC Reactivation,” was led by Valeria Pietropaolo, of Sapienza University in Rome and the Sbarro Institute for Cancer Research and Molecular Medicine at Temple University in Philadelphia.

The paper has been cited 10 times, according to Thomson Scientific’s Web of Knowledge. The abstract, which is still available, reads:

Continue reading Plagiarism (and plenty of it) fells Crohn’s paper

Doing the right thing: Physicists retract paper after becoming aware of “a fundamental error”

prl-bannerThe authors of a paper in Physical Review Letters have retracted it, after another researcher pointed out a mistake.

F. Sattin and D.F. Escande write in the notice for “Alfvénic Propagation: A Key to Nonlocal Effects in Magnetized Plasmas” (which is behind a paywall) that after the paper was published, they “we became aware of a fundamental error in the normalization of our equations.” Excerpt: Continue reading Doing the right thing: Physicists retract paper after becoming aware of “a fundamental error”