The case report in Anaesthesia and Intensive Care — about a six-year-old boy with a rare neurological condition who died following administration of anesthesia — caused the boy’s parents great distress when it appeared in November.
Cell Metabolism has retracted a 2006 article by a group of researchers at Oxford in England after an investigation concluded that the first author had committed misconduct.
The paper, “Nicotinamide nucleotide transhydrogenase: A key role in insulin secretion,” came from the lab of Frances Ashcroft, a world-renowned expert on ion channels. (We’ve written about Ashcroft’s lab before.)
Climacteric is retracting a 2013 article by a group of researchers in Seoul who used data from a paper by another duo of Korean scientists also published in, you guessed it, Climacteric.
A group of researchers have lost a paper in a computer science journal because they were apparently using its references to help the impact factor of a different journal that one of them edits.
Living Cell Technologies (LCT), a biotech company headquartered in Australia, has retracted a 2011 paper purporting to show that their product reversed Parkinson’s symptoms in rats after “being unable to reconfirm their reported results and a possible deviation from the protocol.”
On Saturday, we highlighted a great two-part series by Joseph Neff of the News & Observer diving into the story of “Stefan Franzen, a chemistry professor at North Carolina State University who has been trying unsuccessfully to correct the scientific record.” Today, that series became a three-part series, with a new story revealing that an investigation by the National Science Foundation (NSF) Office of the Inspector General (OIG) had found “reckless” falsification in the work in question.
Neurology has issued an expression of concern over a 2013 article by a group of scientists in The Netherlands and the United States who found a potentially devastating error in their analysis.
Some retraction news from outside of science: TheBath Magazine has pulled an issue whose running-centric cover was virtually identical to that of the Boston Magazine tribute to last year’s tragic marathon in that city.
According to the Bath Chronicle, the UK magazine was aware of the Boston Magazine cover art — a heart-shaped ring of running shoes — but decided to proceed with its version anyway. We’d call that an error in judgment.