Category: investigator error

“Barriers to retraction may impede correction of the literature:” New study

faseb june 2014One of the complaints we often hear about the self-correcting nature of science is that authors and editors seem very reluctant to retract papers with obvious fatal flaws. Indeed, it seems fairly clear that the number of papers retracted is smaller than the number of those that should be.

To try to get a sense of how errors are corrected in the literature, Arturo Casadevall, Grant Steen, and Ferric Fang, whose work on retractions will be familiar to our readers, in a new paper in the FASEB Journal, look at the sources of error in papers retracted for reasons other than misconduct.

Here’s the abstract (emphasis ours): Continue reading “Barriers to retraction may impede correction of the literature:” New study

Update: Lab head shares “painful” process that led to Molecular Cell retraction

molecular cell 14Last month, we published a guest post by Jean Hazel Mendoza about the retraction of a Molecular Cell paper for sampling errors, flawed analysis, and and miscalculation.

Mendoza heard back from Jean-François Allemand, the head of one of the labs involved. Allemand tells Retraction Watch by email that when his group tried to repeat the experiment, they suspected of “missing” or “averaging” of data points in the retracted paper: Continue reading Update: Lab head shares “painful” process that led to Molecular Cell retraction

Sampling error, flawed analysis, and miscalculation trigger Molecular Cell retraction

molecular cell 14Guest post by Jean Hazel Mendoza

A group of researchers from France has retracted a 2013 paper from Molecular Cell after realizing that their analyses of microscopy images were flawed.

Here’s the notice for “RecA-Promoted, RecFOR-Independent Progressive Disassembly of Replisomes Stalled by Helicase Inactivation:” Continue reading Sampling error, flawed analysis, and miscalculation trigger Molecular Cell retraction

“Gremlins” caused errors in climate change paper showing gains from global warming

jep_coverThe author of a controversial 2009 paper arguing that at least some amount of global warming could lead to economic gains has corrected the paper, along with a later article in a different journal. We confess to be baffled by the implications of the mix-up, although others appear to be less confused.

The 2009 article, “The Economic Effects of Climate Change,” was written by Richard Tol, of the University of Sussex, and appeared in the Journal of Economic Perspectives. It has been cited 91 times, according to Thomson Scientific’s Web of Science.

Here’s the abstract:

Continue reading “Gremlins” caused errors in climate change paper showing gains from global warming

Lactobacillus intolerance: Bacterium mixup forces retraction

bjncoverThe British Journal of Nutrition has retracted a 2013 paper by a group of researchers from Taiwan after learning that the authors had studied the wrong strain of microbe.

The article was titled “Oral Lactobacillus reuteri GMN-32 treatment reduces blood glucose concentrations and promotes cardiac function in rats with streptozotocin-induced diabetes mellitus.”

According to the abstract: Continue reading Lactobacillus intolerance: Bacterium mixup forces retraction

BMJ authors take back inaccurate statin safety statements

bmjcover514Last October, the BMJ published a paper by a group of researchers from the United States and Canada questioning the use of statins in patients considered at low risk of cardiovascular disease.

The article has been cited eight times since then, according to Thomson Scientific’s Web of Knowledge. It mentioned data from another study that reported a high rate of side effects in patients who used the drugs, between 18% and 20% — suggesting that those who received little or no benefit from the therapy could be more more likely to suffer harm than good.

But that citation turns out to have been flawed — prompting the journal to take the unusual step of removing those “statements” from the article and another it published about the issue that has been cited six times. And in an editorial, BMJ editor Fiona Godlee said she has asked a panel of experts to review the original paper to determine if it ought to be retracted completely: Continue reading BMJ authors take back inaccurate statin safety statements

Contaminated cells force retraction of Blood paper

blood414Blood has an interesting retraction of a 2011 paper on what a group of authors claimed was a new cell line — but which proved, apparently, to be a chimera.

The article, “Oxygen-regulated expression of the erythropoietin gene in the human renal cell line REPC,” came from a team at Universität Duisburg-Essen, in Germany, and has been cited 21 times, according to Thomson Scientific’s Web of Knowledge. Here’s the abstract: Continue reading Contaminated cells force retraction of Blood paper

Wrong cell line leads to retraction of kidney cancer study

plosoneA group of authors in China has retracted their December 2013 paper in PLoS ONE after realizing that they’d been studying the wrong cells.

The paper, “Up-Regulation of pVHL along with Down-Regulation of HIF-1α by NDRG2 Expression Attenuates Proliferation and Invasion in Renal Cancer Cells,” came from Lei Gao, of the Fourth Military Medical University, in Xi’an, and colleagues. It purported to find that:

Continue reading Wrong cell line leads to retraction of kidney cancer study

Plant paper retracted when new species turns out not to be so new

nordic plantIn December, a group of biologists in Thailand published a paper in the Nordic Journal of Botany heralding the discovery of a new species of plant:

Bauhinia saksuwaniae, a new species from northeastern Thailand is described and illustrated. It appears to be an endemic and endangered species. The new species is obviously distinct from all other species of Thai Bauhinia in having large orbicular persistent bracteoles forming a cup-shape and enclosing a young floral bud.

But then came this retraction: Continue reading Plant paper retracted when new species turns out not to be so new

Authors retract study suggesting magnesium prevents Alzheimer’s in mice

j neuroscienceThe authors of a 2013 Journal of Neuroscience study suggesting that “elevation of brain magnesium…may have therapeutic potential for treating [Alzheimer’s disease] in humans” have retracted it after finding errors in the work.

Here’s the original abstract:

Continue reading Authors retract study suggesting magnesium prevents Alzheimer’s in mice