A gynecologic cancer researcher at Oita University in Japan has retracted three papers by his group after the discovery of duplicated figures and manipulated images.
The three papers by Noriyuki Takai and colleagues all appeared in Gynecologic Oncology: Continue reading Three gynecologic cancer studies retracted for figure duplication, image manipulation
Irony alert: The Journal of Forensic and Legal Medicine, which really ought to know better, is retracting a 2012 article by an Australian researcher that threatened to run afoul of…privacy law.
The article, “A challenging injury interpretation: Could this be a stab wound?” was written by Les Griffiths, of the Clinical Forensic Medical Unit at University of Queensland in Brisbane. According to the notice: Continue reading Legal medicine journal pulls paper over image goof
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews has retracted a 2008 paper by a group from the United States and Botswana, citing plagiarism and unauthorized use of data.
The article, “Solar chimney power generation project—The case for Botswana,” discussed a project by the Botswanan military to develop a power plant based on the chimney design. The paper is no longer available online, but we found this Wikipedia entry that mentions it: Continue reading Solar energy paper retracted for text, data misuse
We’ve seen this movie before: Researchers present a study at a scientific meeting, then learn to their surprise (and, sometimes, chagrin) that a journal has published the data in a supplement or other edition.
That’s the case with a group of UK scientists whose abstract for a meeting of the British Toxicology Society wound up in the journal Toxicology — only to be expunged when they complained.
The work was titled “Molecular mechanisms involved in resistance of CLL cells towards ABT-737, a specific BCL-2 inhibitor.” Gerald Cohen, of the University of Leicester, who led the study, told us: Continue reading Journal “mistake” forces removal of toxicology study by leading scientist
Why just have three peer-reviewed publications when you can reuse figures to publish a fourth?
That’s the sort of thinking that got one research group slapped with a retraction of their 2009 study, “Carbon Nanotubes Are Able To Penetrate Plant Seed Coat and Dramatically Affect Seed Germination and Plant Growth.”
The journal ACS Nano, published by the American Chemical Society, issued the retraction on Aug. 20: Continue reading Reused figures lead to two chemistry retractions, one correction
The World Journal of Surgical Oncology has posted the retraction of a 2010 article by Italian researchers who lifted substantial parts of their text from a group that had published on the same topic seven years earlier.
The article, “Colon and rectal surgery for cancer without mechanical bowel preparation: one-center randomized prospective trial,” came from a group of surgical oncologists at San Martino Hospital in Genoa led by Stefano Scabini, who is listed in other publications as chief of the service.
According to the notice: Continue reading Authors retract “one-center” cancer study for plagiarizing from…another center
A group of researchers from Texas and Zimbabwe has lost a paper after they tried publishing it twice — first in the European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology, and then in the International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy.
Here’s the notice: Continue reading Study linking antidepressants to diabetes retracted when authors publish it twice
Perhaps fittingly in today’s age of sensitive feelings, the typical reaction to a retraction (per the notices, at least) is apology. But bliss?
Expert Opinion on Investigational Drugs has a new one in the annals of penitence. At issue is a 2010 paper titled “Horizon scanning for novel therapeutics for the treatment of prostate cancer,” by Dieletta Bianchini. Turns out the authors had published the same (or nearly so) paper two months earlier in a different journal. Here’s the notice: Continue reading Retraction for prostate cancer paper duplication leaves authors penitent, “happy”
It’s tempting to start calling this a trend.
Three Elsevier math journals are among the latest scientific publications to be retracting papers because fake email addresses were used to obtain favorable peer reviews.
The three papers appear in two journals: “On two subclasses of (α,β)-metrics being projectively related,” in the Journal of Geometry and Physics; and “Complex Bogoslovsky Finsler metrics” and “Sasaki–Randers metric in Finsler geometry,” in the Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications. All three share authors Akbar Tayebi, of the University of Qom, Iran, and Esmaeil Peyghan, of Arak University, also in Iran.
The notices in the Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications read as follows (the EES refers to the Elsevier Editorial System): Continue reading Iranian mathematicians latest to have papers retracted for fake email addresses to get better reviews
Last spring, we reported on the retraction in Clinical and Translational Allergy of a 2011 paper by researchers in Egypt and Finland after “severe problems in the data set” were uncovered. The notice cited an earlier study, from 2009, in Acta Paediatrica, that formed the basis for the subsequent trial.
At the time, the Acta Paediatrica paper still stood. No longer: Continue reading Allergy researchers lose second paper over “severe problems” with data