Midsagittal image of the anatomy of sexual intercourse, from BMJ http://bit.ly/v2ZkxQ
Yesterday we reported on the retraction for data misuse and plagiarism of a 21-year-old paper on sex and female cancer patients. Turns out we missed a couple of rather interesting details about the authors of the pulled article.
Leukemia & Lymphoma has retracted 2004 paper by a group of authors in Mexico after concluding that, well, the article never should have been accepted to begin with.
The Annual Review of Sex Research (which is a supplement to the Journal of Sex Research) has retracted a 1992 paper by a group of researchers who lifted much of their analysis from two even older articles by another scholar. At 21 years post-publication, this is one of the oldest — but not the record-oldest — retractions we’ve covered to date.
The pulled paper, “Sexuality and cancer in women,” came from Willibrord C. M. Weijmar Schultz, Harry B. M. Van de Wiel, Daniela E. E. Hahn, and Mels F. Van Driel. (Weijmar Schultz and Van de Wiel are co-authors of this rather curious passage about the appropriateness of sexual contact between doctors and patients:
An article published in the Bulletin of the Italian Society of Entomology has been retracted in the wake of a squabble over the ownership of the data.
The 2012 paper, “A contribution to the Ichneumoninae fauna of Sicily (Hymenoptera Ichneumonidae,” was written by Matthias Riedel and Salvatore Tomarchio, and deals with the so-called ichneumon wasps (or flies), a family with some 60,000 member species worldwide and one that, as this Wikipedia entry notes, caught the particular attention of Charles Darwin: Continue reading Dispute over data forces retraction of wasp paper
Last month, Ivan met David Vaux at the 3rd World Conference on Research Integrity in Montreal. David mentioned a retraction he published in Nature, and we thought it would be a great guest post on what it’s like to retract one of your own papers in an attempt to clean up the literature.
David Vaux
In September 1995 Nature asked me to review a manuscript by Bellgrau and co-workers, which subsequently appeared. I was very excited by this paper, as it showed that expression of CD95L on Sertoli cells in allogeneic mismatched testes tissue transplanted under the kidney capsule was able to induce apoptosis of invading cytotoxic T cells, thereby preventing rejection. As I wrote in a News and Views piece, the implications of these findings were enormous – grafts engineered to express CD95L would be able to prevent rejection without generalized immunosuppression.
In fact, I was so taken by these findings that we started generation of transgenic mice that expressed CD95L on their islet beta cells to see if it would allow islet cell grafts to avoid rejection and provide a cure for diabetes in mismatched recipients.
Germans and Italians are big masterbatchers. Click to enlarge. via http://bit.ly/100YBKB
Our mothers told us that if we used the masterbatch process, we’d go blind. And what better way to gather some updates to recent posts than to include one that involves said masterbatch process?
Human-centric Computing and Information Sciences is retracting a 2012 paper on a “model approach” to e-learning that well, was anything but a model approach to scientific publishing.
The article, “Implications of E-learning systems and self-efficiency on students outcomes: a model approach,” was written by Tanzila Saba, who has been affiliated with institutions in Malaysia and Pakistan.
A pair of South Korean authors have gotten a five-year ban from the journal for double-publishing a paper in the math literature.
The article, “Convergence of Weighted Sums for Arrays of Negatively Dependent Random Variables and Its Applications,” was written by Jong-Il Baek and Sung-Tae Park of Wonkwang University in IkSan.
A technical hiccup led the Journal of Translational Medicine to double publish a 2012 paper by a pair of researchers from China and the United States, leading to a retraction.
The article is/was titled “Opportunities and challenges of disease biomarkers: a new section in the journal of translational medicine,” and it was written by Xiangdong Wang and Peter Ward — both members of the journal’s editorial board. It appeared in the Nov. 7, 2012 issue of the JTM. And it appeared less than a month later, on Dec. 5.
