Category: authorship issues

Chemical engineering journal retracts paper with unknowing author

AiChemE-logoAIChemE’s website promises, “Subscribing to the AIChE Journal is like having access to nine topical journals in the field.”

Without a subscription, though, you might miss out on some valuable topical information – like why a paper you want to cite has been retracted, something the Committee on Publication Ethics recommends be freely available.

Here’s the notice for “Flow Structure and Particle Motions in a Gas-Polyethylene Fluidized Bed,” originally published in 2007:

Continue reading Chemical engineering journal retracts paper with unknowing author

This retraction has teeth: Journal changes publication policy after discovering misconduct

Screen Shot 2014-08-26 at 10.43.29 AMThe Indian Society of Periodontology has changed their editorial policy as the result of an author who had “neither taken adequate permission from nor given due acknowledgement to all authors concerned.”

Now, any authors will be required to sign a contract acknowledging accountability for the content of the submitted paper, as well as be able to state the specific work contributed by each author.

Here’s the notice from the Journal of the Indian Society of Periodontology: Continue reading This retraction has teeth: Journal changes publication policy after discovering misconduct

Bitter rheumatology authorship dispute ends in retraction

rbrA 2012 expression of concern prompted by an authorship dispute has been upgraded to a retraction.

As we reported in 2012, Revista Brasiliera de Reumatologia (aka the Brazilian Journal of Rheumatology) issued an expression of concern about “Anticitrullinated peptide antibodies and rheumatoid factor in Sudanese patients with Leishmania donovani infection” after

a claim from one of the authors, questioning the authorship of the corresponding author, and informed that the article was under submission to another journal.

The journal sought the advice of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), and continued its investigation. That investigation is apparently now complete, and this retraction notice is the result: Continue reading Bitter rheumatology authorship dispute ends in retraction

Author squabble sinks cardiology papers

Two papers on “novel techniques” have been retracted with what is unfortunately a very non-novel technique: an odd notice and silence when we asked for comment.

Here’s the explanation for retraction of “A novel approach to treat residual peridevice leakage after left-atrial appendage closure,” by Wunderlich N, Wilson N, and Sievert H: Continue reading Author squabble sinks cardiology papers

Wayward “contractor” prompts expression of concern for PLoS ONE paper on cancer cells

logoThe editors of PLoS ONE have issued an Expression of Concern (which seems likely to become a retraction) for a 2014 paper by a group of researchers in China who claim to have been led astray by a contractor hired to “edit the language” of the report.

The article, “Arsenic Sulfide Promotes Apoptosis in Retinoid Acid Resistant Human Acute Promyelocytic Leukemic NB4-R1 Cells through Downregulation of SET Protein,” came from a group in the Department of Hematology at the First Affiliated Hospital at Xi’an Jiaotong University, and was led by Yuwang Tian, a pathologist at the General Hospital of Beijing Military Area of PLA.

Or at least that’s what the manuscript eventually said. According to the expression of concern, however, that’s not what it said initially: Continue reading Wayward “contractor” prompts expression of concern for PLoS ONE paper on cancer cells

University of Queensland investigation leads to third retraction

isjplA duo of former University of Queensland researchers have had a third article retracted following an investigation into 92 papers.

In September, Bruce Murdoch and Caroline Barwood had a paper in the European Journal of Neurology retracted. Earlier this month, the same happened to a paper in Aphasiology.

The retraction announced by the university today is for a 2013 paper in the International Journal of Speech-Language Pathology.

Here’s the notice, which is brief and behind a paywall: Continue reading University of Queensland investigation leads to third retraction

Heart study retracted because it was submitted without permission of most of the authors

clincardcoverA group of authors in South Korea has lost their 2012 paper in Clinical Cardiology because, well, they weren’t a group after all.

The paper, “Correlation of Electrocardiographic Changes and Myocardial Fibrosis in Patients With Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy Detected by Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging,” came from corresponding author of Konkuk University School of Medicine in Seoul, and a half-dozen colleagues. At least, that’s what the manuscript said.

But according to the retraction notice, Yang had nothing to do with the paper — nor did five other co-authors. Continue reading Heart study retracted because it was submitted without permission of most of the authors

Neurosurgery journal retracts spine paper for lack of attribution

bjneurosurgA neurosurgeon in the UK has lost his 2013 paper on spinal surgery in the British Journal of Neurosurgery for doing what appears to have been an end-run around the folks that did the work.

The article, “The management of spinal dural fistulas: a 13-year retrospective analysis,” was written by Denosshan Sri, of Addenbrooke’s Hospital, in Cambridge.

Here’s the abstract:

Continue reading Neurosurgery journal retracts spine paper for lack of attribution

A matter of degree: M. Theol loses a paper

jreghealthEvidently the editors of the Journal of Religion and Health were a tad distracted when they published a paper earlier this year by Australian theologian Joseph Lee and his “colleague,” M. Theol.

M. Theol, of course, is a degree, not a person — as a correction notice explains:

Continue reading A matter of degree: M. Theol loses a paper

Entomologist surprised to find name on now-retracted paper alleging fossils oppose Darwin’s theory of evolution

jblsThe Journal of Biology and Life Science, published by the Macrothink Institute, has retracted a paper that claimed “fossil does not provides [sic] the convincing and direct evidences for evolution,” for reasons that they left to us to figure out.

The entire notice for “Fossils Evidences (Paleontology) Opposite to Darwin’s Theory,” allegedly written by Md. Abdul Ahad, of Hajee Mohamed Danesh Science and Technology University in Bangladesh, and Charles D. Michener, of the University of Kansas, reads:

The editorial board announced that this article has been retracted on February 25, 2014. If you have any further question, please contact us at: [email protected]