Category: united states

I know you are but what am I? School program paper pulled for duplication

sciworldjrnlAn article on youth development programs in Hong Kong has been retracted for its similarity to another article on youth development programs by the same authors.

The paper, “Process Evaluation of a Positive Youth Development Program in Hong Kong Based on Different Cohorts,” appeared in 2012 in The Scientific World Journal, and was written by a pair of researchers with appointments in Hong Kong, Macau, Shanghai, and the United States. It has been cited twice, according to Thomson Scientific’s Web of Knowledge.

According to the abstract: Continue reading I know you are but what am I? School program paper pulled for duplication

Bearly believable: Water bear paper retracted for missing lab notebooks

Water bear, via Wikimedia Commons
Image via Wikimedia Commons

Tardigrades, the most hardy animals on or off planet Earth, can survive boiling, freezing, and even the ravages of outer space.

Unfortunately, some data on water bears’ memories proved to be less long-lasting, earning a retraction for a George Mason University researcher who also published the paper without alerting her co-workers ahead of time.

Here’s the notice for “Suspended animation: effects on short-term and long-term positive associative memory in Hypsibius dujardini,” which first appeared in Invertebrate Neuroscience: Continue reading Bearly believable: Water bear paper retracted for missing lab notebooks

“Research misconduct accounts for a small percentage of total funding”: Study

elifeHow much money does scientific fraud waste?

That’s an important question, with an answer that may help determine how much attention some people pay to research misconduct. But it’s one that hasn’t been rigorously addressed.

Seeking some clarity,  Andrew Stern, Arturo Casadevall, Grant Steen, and Ferric Fang looked at cases in which the Office of Research Integrity had determined there was misconduct in particular papers. In their study, published today in eLife: Continue reading “Research misconduct accounts for a small percentage of total funding”: Study

University of Maryland duo notches third retraction

Anil Jaiswal, via U Maryland
Anil Jaiswal, via U Maryland

A pair of researchers at the University of Maryland have retracted a third paper.

Here’s the unhelpful Journal of Biological Chemistry notice for “Inhibitor of Nrf2 (INrf2 or Keap1) protein degrades Bcl-xL via phosphoglycerate mutase 5 and controls cellular apoptosis,” by Suryakant Niture and Anil Jaiswal: Continue reading University of Maryland duo notches third retraction

Cell retraction of Alzheimer’s study is second for Tufts neuroscientist

Domnez_Gizem
Gizem Donmez, via Tufts

A researcher at Tufts University has retracted a paper in Cell, a year after retracting a study on a similar subject from the Journal of Biological Chemistry.

Here’s the notice for “SIRT1 Suppresses β-Amyloid Production by Activating the α-Secretase Gene ADAM10,” a 2010 paper by Tufts’ Gizem Donmez, MIT’s Leonard Guarante — of longevity research fame — and colleagues: Continue reading Cell retraction of Alzheimer’s study is second for Tufts neuroscientist

Harvard stem cell scientist Vacanti taking leave in wake of STAP retractions

vacanti
Charles Vacanti, by Diemut Strebe via BWH

Charles Vacanti, a Harvard anesthesiologist and stem cell pioneer whose name appeared on both retracted STAP stem cell papers, is giving up his post as chair of anesthesiology at Brigham and Women’s Hospital, and taking a year-long sabbatical.

According to the Knoepfler Lab Stem Cell Blog, which as become a must-read for anyone interested in the STAP saga, Vacanti — the corresponding author, with Haruko Obokata, on one of the Nature articles, and a co-author on the other — told colleagues in an email: Continue reading Harvard stem cell scientist Vacanti taking leave in wake of STAP retractions

Authors retract highly cited XMRV-prostate cancer link paper from PNAS

pnas 1113Retraction Watch readers may recall that nearly two years ago, an editor at PLOS declared the scientific story of a link between XMRV, aka xenotropic murine leukemia-related virus, and prostate cancer over, saying that a retraction from PLOS Pathogens was the “final chapter.” (That retraction led to an apology from the journal about how it was handled.)

Perhaps, however, there is an epilogue. This week, a group of authors who published a highly cited 2009 study in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) making the same link retracted it. Here’s the notice, signed by all five authors: Continue reading Authors retract highly cited XMRV-prostate cancer link paper from PNAS

Hydrogen journal pulls palladium paper for data misuse

intjhydrogenenergyThe International Journal of Hydrogen Energy is retracting a 2013 article for what appears to be the misappropriation of data.

The paper,  titled “Hydrogen production by an anaerobic photocatalytic reforming using palladium nanoparticle on boron and nitrogen doped TiO2 catalysts,” was written by researchers from the Veltech Dr RR & Dr SR Technical University, in Chennai, India, and Arizona State University.

According to the abstract: Continue reading Hydrogen journal pulls palladium paper for data misuse

A year after ORI report, hematology journal retracts faked paper

bloodA year after an ORI report discredited the work of former University of Washington in Seattle researcher Andrew Aprikyan, one of the papers named in the report has finally been retracted.

Here’s the notice for “Impaired survival of bone marrow hematopoietic progenitor cells in cyclic neutropenia”:  Continue reading A year after ORI report, hematology journal retracts faked paper

Panel says BMJ was right to not retract two disputed statin papers

bmjA panel reviewing The BMJ‘s handling of two controversial statin papers said the journal didn’t err when it corrected, rather than retracted, the articles.

The articles — a research paper and a commentary — suggested that use of statins in people at low risk for cardiovascular disease could be doing far more harm than good. Both articles inaccurately cited a study that provided data important to their conclusions — an error pointed out vigorously by a British researcher, Rory Collins, who demanded that the journal pull the pieces.

In a letter to Godlee this spring, Collins wrote: Continue reading Panel says BMJ was right to not retract two disputed statin papers