Category: freely available

Journal retracts antipsychotic study when all subjects’ PET scans turn out to be unreliable or invalid

The Journal of Psychiatric Research is retracting a 2010 paper claiming to show a relationship between quetiapine (Seroquel) and certain lab tests and brain scans, after it turns out the brain images were either unreliable or invalid.

Here’s the notice for “Relationship between dopamine D2 receptor occupancy, clinical response, and drug and monoamine metabolites levels in plasma and cerebrospinal fluid. A pilot study in patients suffering from first-episode schizophrenia treated with quetiapine”: Continue reading Journal retracts antipsychotic study when all subjects’ PET scans turn out to be unreliable or invalid

Second helpings: Immunology journal retracts paper for plagiarism, then U Bari investigation reveals fraud

The journal Immunopharmacology and Immunotoxicology has retracted a 2011 paper by an Italian nursing researcher who lifted text and data from a previously published work, and made up results to fill gaps, too.

Here’s the notice: Continue reading Second helpings: Immunology journal retracts paper for plagiarism, then U Bari investigation reveals fraud

A first? Papers retracted for citation manipulation

In what appears to be a first, two papers have been retracted for including citations designed to help another journal improve its impact factor rankings. The articles in The Scientific World Journal cited papers in Cell Transplantation, which in turn appears to have cited to a high degree other journals with shared board members.

Here’s publisher Hindawi’s statement on the matter, which involved their publication The Scientific World Journal: Continue reading A first? Papers retracted for citation manipulation

Clinical Endoscopy retracts sedation paper, creates neologism in process

Clinical Endoscopy, the official journal of the Korean Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, has retracted a 2011 paper on sedation practices.

Although the retraction statement is underpowered for information, it has a charming neologism. To wit, the announcement for the paper, “Comparison of midazolam alone versus midazolam plus propofol during endoscopic submucosal dissection,” is a “noticement.”

Unfortunately, that’s about all that’s interesting about this retraction. Or rather, that’s the only thing on which we can comment, given the notice itself:
Continue reading Clinical Endoscopy retracts sedation paper, creates neologism in process

Authors retract PLoS Medicine foreign health aid paper that had criticized earlier Lancet study

On May 8, PLoS Medicine published a paper by Rajaie Batniji and Eran Bendavid of Stanford University, about “whether development assistance for health provided to developing country governments increases health expenditures.”

That paper caught the eye of the Center for Global Development’s David Roodman. He began a May 14 blog post about the study, “The Health Aid Fungibility Debate: Don’t Believe Either Side,” as follows: Continue reading Authors retract PLoS Medicine foreign health aid paper that had criticized earlier Lancet study

Withdraw that emotion: Psych journal retracts two Stapel papers on mood

Two more papers from Dutch fraudster Diederik Stapel have been retracted. Both appeared in the journal Psychological Science in 2008, with the same, evidently unwitting co-author, Kirsten Ruys, of Tilburg University.

Here is the notice: Continue reading Withdraw that emotion: Psych journal retracts two Stapel papers on mood

Reverse tissue engineering: data reuse causes retractions of three papers from German organ researchers

The body count has reached three for a group of German tissue engineers who appear to have cloned their data in many of their publications.

Tissue Engineering Part A has retracted one of the papers from the investigators, titled “Clinically established hemostatic scaffold (tissue fleece) as biomatrix in tissue- and organ-engineering research,” which was published in 2003.

The notice states: Continue reading Reverse tissue engineering: data reuse causes retractions of three papers from German organ researchers

Wham, bam, no thank you, ram: Publisher error leads to retraction of already-withdrawn sheep sperm paper

Caution: Sexual innuendo ahead.

The withdrawal method is a notoriously unreliable form of birth control. It seems that what happens between the sheets applies to paper as well as cotton.

Here’s a retraction notice from BMC Research Notes that speaks — and nudges and winks — for itself. The 2011 article, “Effect of controlled and uncontrolled cooling rate on motility parameters of cryopreserved ram spermatozoa,” by a team of Irani veterinary scientists: Continue reading Wham, bam, no thank you, ram: Publisher error leads to retraction of already-withdrawn sheep sperm paper

Author whose duplications forced Cell correction retracts paper on Down syndrome

Sebastian Schuchmann, a neuroscience researcher whose duplication errors led to a Cell correction last year, has retracted a 12-year-old paper in the Journal of Neurochemistry whose figures were copied from two of his earlier papers.

Here’s the notice: Continue reading Author whose duplications forced Cell correction retracts paper on Down syndrome

Misconduct burns authors of wax paper, leads to sharply worded retraction notice

Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A is retracting a 2010 paper whose authors misappropriated data, forged an author name — and got a pretty strong backhand slap for the trouble.

The paper, “Green waxes, adhesives and lubricants,” which refers to eco-friendly materials, not Halloween-friendly slimes, was published by a group of researchers from China and Canada. Problem was, the one from Canada evidently didn’t know she was listed on the manuscript, and a big chunk of the work had been misappropriated from her university.

As the notice explains: Continue reading Misconduct burns authors of wax paper, leads to sharply worded retraction notice