Researchers in China have received an expression of concern for a recent paper on COVID-19 pneumonia after editors were alerted to suspicious similarities between the tables in the article and those in a 2018 study by members of the same group.
In case you missed that: The pandemic started long after 2018.
Continue reading COVID-19 pneumonia paper earns expression of concern — for being similar to a pre-pandemic article
A Nature journal has announced that it is conducting a “priority” investigation into a new paper claiming that women in science fare better with male rather than female mentors.
The article, “The association between early career informal mentorship in academic collaborations and junior author performance,” appeared in Nature Communications on November 17, and was written by a trio of authors from New York University’s campus in Abu Dhabi.
According to the abstract:
Continue reading Nature Communications looking into paper on mentorship after strong negative reaction
Science has retracted a 13-year-old paper, five years after data sleuth Elisabeth Bik first raised questions about issues with the images in the article.
The paper, “Secondary siRNAs result from unprimed RNA synthesis and form a distinct class,” appeared in 2007 and was written by a group of researchers in the Netherlands and Switzerland. The senior author of the study was Ronald Plasterk, founder of Frame Cancer Therapeutics in Amsterdam and once a minister in the Dutch government. The article has been cited at least 300 times, according to Clarivate Analytics Web of Science.
It also drew Bik’s attention. In 2015, she posted — as Peer 1 — on PubPeer about her concerns with one of the figures in the paper. Other commenters joined in, including to point out similarities between images in the Science paper and two other articles from members of the group.
Bik said the paper:
Continue reading Science retracts paper co-authored by high-profile scientist and former Dutch ministerPLOS ONE has issued an expression of concern for a paper it published last month suggesting that vitamin D might protect against severe COVID-19.
Central to the concerns is that the authors seem to have been too far out over their skis in asserting a link between the vitamin and the response to the infection. But as the EoC reveals, many of the potential problems can fairly be attributed to porous peer review as much as over-ambitious authors.
The article, “Vitamin D sufficiency, a serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D at least 30 ng/mL reduced risk for adverse clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19 infection,” came from a group at Tehran University of Medical Sciences in Iran and Boston University in the United States. According to the authors:
Continue reading Paper suggesting vitamin D might protect against COVID-19 earns an expression of concern
A BMJ journal has retracted and replaced a paper on chronic fatigue in children after admitting that it misrepresented the nature of the research in the editing process. But the article has drawn scrutiny beyond merely the characterization of the analysis.
The paper, “Cognitive–behavioural therapy combined with music therapy for chronic fatigue following Epstein-Barr virus infection in adolescents: a feasibility study,” appeared in early April in BMJ Paediatrics Open, and was written by a group in Norway. The paper is technically not about chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS), but in the introduction the authors write:
Continue reading BMJ journal retracts, replaces study on chronic fatigue in childrenIf accompanied by other symptoms, such as exertion intolerance, chronic pain and cognitive impairments, the patient might fulfil one of the diagnostic criteria for chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS).
In July 2014, Elisabeth Bik notified PLOS ONE that she’d found three papers in the journal by a group of researchers who had clearly manipulated figures in the articles.
More than six years later, the journal has finally retracted the publications.
The authors were affiliated with the Fourth Military Medical University in Shaanxi, China. The notice for 2013’s “Hyperthermia-induced NDRG2 upregulation inhibits the invasion of human hepatocellular carcinoma via suppressing ERK1/2 signaling pathway” refers to overlapping data in Figure 1A, similarities between data in Figure 1B and Figure 6C despite the fact that lanes “represent samples exposed to different experimental conditions,” and more:
Continue reading “I do wish that journal editors would not take six years to perform an investigation and to retract.”
Science has retracted a paper it published in July by a group of authors in China over concerns about two images in the article — problems the researchers have attributed to chaos in their group due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
The paper, “Proton transport enabled by a field-induced metallic state in a semiconductor heterostructure,” was a collaboration by researchers from various institutions in the country, as well as one in the United Kingdom. The senior author was H.B. Song, of the University of Geosciences in Wuhan.
Shortly after publication, Fang Zhouz, a science sleuth in China, posted concerns about the article on his blog — which drew the attention of Elisabeth Bik. Bik eventually amplified those concerns on PubPeer, where she noted that:
Continue reading Science retracts paper as authors blame pandemic for image issues
The Journal of Biological Chemistry has retracted two papers by a group from the University of Toronto over what the leader of the research says were “misguided efforts” by a co-author to make the perfect Western blot.
The retractions are among a batch of seven recent removals by the journal for image issues, some of which were flagged on PubPeer.
Two of the papers, which date back to 2004, come from one group, two from another and two from a third. The seventh is a stand-alone for a group with a history of problematic articles.
Continue reading Author says ‘misguided efforts for the ideal western blot led to the withdrawal of these studies’
The Journal of the American College of Cardiology (JACC) has retracted two 2018 papers out of the University of Oxford because of misconduct.
Both retraction notices blame first author Alexander Liu, a student in the lab at the time, who disputes the retractions. The studies were part of a larger effort to improve heart imaging that caught the attention of cardiologists and was highlighted by Oxford in 2015.
Here’s the notice for “Diagnosis of Microvascular Angina Using Cardiac Magnetic Resonance,” a paper that has been cited 59 times, according to Clarivate Analytics’ Web of Science, earning it a “highly cited paper” designation:
Continue reading Major heart journal retracts two papers from Oxford group for misconduct
A homeopathy journal that Elsevier dropped in the wake of concerns about excessive self-citation appears to have carved out a new niche for itself: self-pity.
In 2016, Homeopathy lost its slot on Thomson Reuters’s (now Clarivate’s) influential journal rankings list after an analysis found that more than 70% of citations in the papers it published were of papers it published. That led Elsevier to cut the journal loose — although it remains in business under the umbrella of Thieme, and has since earned its impact factor back. (For more on why that’s important to journals, see this story.)
Part of Homeopathy’s mission under new ownership, it seems, is to criticize journals that have spurned its contributors. Well, one journal, anyway.
Continue reading Did a journal retract your paper on homeopathy? Meet the journal that will publish your complaint.jpg){kind=link}