The American Heart Association (AHA) is retracting five studies by Hiroaki Matsubara, a former Kyoto Prefectural University cardiology researcher, that it had subjected to an expression of concern last year.
Here’s the notice: Continue reading Cardiology journals retract five Matsubara studies
Industrial and Corporate Change is the site of management professor Ulrich Lichtenthaler’s 12th retraction.
Here’s the notice for “Outward knowledge transfer: the impact of project-based organization on performance,” originally published in 2010: Continue reading Ulrich Lichtenthaler now up to 12 retractions
The European Journal of Pharmacology has — against its will, it would seem — retracted a 2012 paper by a group of Chinese heart researchers embroiled in a what appears to be a rather messy authorship dispute.
The article, “The effect of alendronate on the expression of osteopontin and osteoprotegerin in calcified aortic tissue of the rat,” came from the Institute of Cardiovascular Disease at Tongji Hospital, part of of Huazhong University of Science and Technology.
As the retraction notice states:
Continue reading Author break prompts retraction of bone protein paper
Just two days ago, we covered the ninth retraction for Jesús Lemus, “the veterinary researcher whose work colleagues have had trouble verifying, including being unable to confirm the identity of one of his co-authors.” And already another of his retractions has appeared in one of our daily alerts.
This one appears in PLOS ONE, for “Infectious Offspring: How Birds Acquire and Transmit an Avian Polyomavirus in the Wild:” Continue reading Tenth retraction appears for Jesús Lemus, this one in PLOS ONE
Amid an ongoing investigation, a group of psychology researchers at the University of Leuven (KU Leuven) in Belgium have taken a painful decision to retract a paper now that they’ve realized there were serious problems with one aspect of the work.
Here’s the notice for “The Emergence of Orthographic Word Representations in the Brain: Evaluating a Neural Shape-Based Framework Using fMRI and the HMAX Model,” by Wouter Braet, Jonas Kubilius, Johan Wagemans, and Hans P. Op de Beeck: Continue reading Doing the right thing: Psychology researchers retract after realizing data “were not analyzed properly”
Jesús Lemus — the veterinary researcher whose work colleagues have had trouble verifying, including being unable to confirm the identity of one of his co-authors — has notched his ninth retraction.
It’s a clear and comprehensive notice, from the Journal of Applied Ecology, despite the bizarre nature of the case: Continue reading “Ephemeral nature” of samples — and co-author — leads to ninth Jesús Lemus retraction
The Aging Male (the journal, not the demographic) is retracting a 2013 paper by a group of Chinese researchers who’d published the same work — more or less — in a Chinese title.
The article, “Testosterone therapy improves psychological distress and health-related quality of life in Chinese men with symptomatic late-onset hypogonadism patients,” came from a group at Peking University People’s Hospital, in Beijing.
But as the retraction notice explains: Continue reading Don’t feel so bad, The Aging Male: It happens to lots of journals
A paper on partially entangled states seems to have fallen victim to a confusing entanglement of authors and studies.
Here’s the notice for the paper, “Optimal quantum communication using multiparticle partially entangled states,” by Atul Kumar, Satyabrata Adhikari, Subhashish Banerjee, and Sovik Roy: Continue reading Paper on partially entangled states retracted for partially entangling authors
Chinese researchers have had a 2012 paper in Plant Molecular Biology Reporter on genetically modified wheat retracted, in a notice that cites fraud.
The article, “Isolation and Functional Characterization of an Antifreeze Protein Gene, TaAFPIII, from Wheat (Triticum aestivum),” came from the same group we wrote about in April 2012 when they retracted a paper from Acta Biochimica et Biophysica Sinica, also about genetically altered wheat.
At the time, the authors said they were pulling the other paper because they were having trouble replicating their findings. That now seems accurate, but not entirely complete.
As the new retraction notice states: Continue reading A retraction with “serious consequences to wheat production”
We’re all for research on improving communication and collaboration among colleagues. But we trust that the experts know what they’re doing. You can see where this is going.
The journal Nurse Education Today has retracted a 2012 article, “Interprofessional learning in acute care: Developing a theoretical framework,” by a UK scholar because, how shall we put it, he might need a few lessons in interprofessionalism.
The retraction notice explains it neatly: Continue reading Not your data: Nursing paper retracted for misuse of findings