Category: lack of IRB approval

193 papers could be retracted: Journal consortium issues ultimatum in Fujii case

A group of editors representing nearly two dozen medical journals has issued an ultimatum of sorts to officials at seven Japanese institutions that once employed Yoshitaka Fujii: Validate the papers of the disgraced anesthesiologist or they will be retracted.

Fujii, as we have reported, was fired by Toho University in late February, putatively for failing to obtain ethics approval for a handful of his studies. That much may be true, but the integrity of his data has been in question for more than a decade. At the time of his dismissal, journal editors expressed concern that the university would not pursue an inquiry into Fujii’s data.

Last month, the journal Anaesthesia published a statistical analysis of Fujii’s research bya UK anesthesiologist named John Carlisle which cast serious doubt on the veracity of the studies.

The joint letter forces the question. Continue reading 193 papers could be retracted: Journal consortium issues ultimatum in Fujii case

Update on Fujii: Anesthesia journal finds overwhelming statistical evidence of data fabrication

There’s a bit more this afternoon on the story of Yoshitaka Fujii, the Japanese anesthesiologist accused of fraud and other misconduct that we reported on yesterday.

The British journal Anaesthesia, which has been looking into Fujii’s research record, has posted four articles and editorials about the case and related issues on its website. One in particular is remarkable for its conclusions. Written by a UK anesthesiologist named John Carlisle, the article claims to have analyzed 169 randomized controlled trials that Fujii conducted between 1991 and 2011.

According to the abstract (which we formatted for readability, and which should be online shortly, we’re told): Continue reading Update on Fujii: Anesthesia journal finds overwhelming statistical evidence of data fabrication

Major fraud probe of Japanese anesthesiologist Yoshitaka Fujii may challenge retraction record

We have learned that a widely published Japanese anesthesiologist is under investigation by his university over concerns that he engaged in repeated fraud for decades that has tainted roughly 180 articles—many of which may be retracted as a result.

In a related move, the journal Clinical Therapeutics is retracting papers by the researcher, Yoshitaka Fujii, most recently of Toho University, in Tokyo. Judy Pachella, managing editor of the journal, confirmed the retractions but would not state how many papers were affected. Clinical Therapeutics published 17 articles by Fujii, between 2003 and 2010.

Continue reading Major fraud probe of Japanese anesthesiologist Yoshitaka Fujii may challenge retraction record

Not so fast! Journal retracts paper from Boldt group over author hijinks, more

We knew we hadn’t heard the last of Joachim Boldt, whose nearly 90 retractions make him the putative record holder for a single author in this indistinguished club. But we didn’t expect this:

The European Journal of Anaesthesiology has retracted a paper, “Supplemental oxygen reduces serotonin levels in plasma and platelets during colorectal surgery and reduces postoperative nausea and vomiting,” from Boldt’s former colleagues at the Klinikum Ludwigshafen after determining that the authors were trying to hide their association with the disgraced anesthesiologist.

Continue reading Not so fast! Journal retracts paper from Boldt group over author hijinks, more

Anesthesia journal editor says “if you blow us off, it will be retracted,” and sticks to his word

The Journal of Clinical Anesthesia has retracted a paper by a group of Israeli authors whose study may not have had appropriate ethical approval — or even collected the reported data.

The article, “Accidental venous and dural puncture during epidural analgesia in obese parturients (BMI > 40 kg/m2): three different body positions during insertion,” was published in 2010 by a team from Assaf Harofeh Medical Center, in Zerifin, one of the country’s largest hospitals and an affiliate of Tel Aviv University. Dural puncture is an infrequent but potentially serious complication of labor anesthesia, causing severe headaches and, in rare cases, death if untreated.

According to the retraction notice: Continue reading Anesthesia journal editor says “if you blow us off, it will be retracted,” and sticks to his word

Cancer issues expression of concern about two Henschke I-ELCAP lung cancer screening papers

The journal Cancer has issued an Expression of Concern about two lung cancer screening papers long dogged by doubt.

Last April, The Cancer Letter and The New York Times jointly published an investigation into the International Early Lung Cancer Action Program (I-ELCAP) run by Claudia Henschke and David Yankelevitz. Other researchers had already criticized the design and conclusions of that trial, but as the investigation noted, an October 2008 review of the study found that the researchers couldn’t find 90 percent of the subjects’ consent forms, an ethical no-no that jeopardizes as many as 135 papers.

Two papers published in Cancer, in 2000 and 2001, are among those studies, according to the notice (links added), which credits the Times and The Cancer Letter and notes that the journal has referred the case to Federal investigators: Continue reading Cancer issues expression of concern about two Henschke I-ELCAP lung cancer screening papers

Lack of ethical approval leads to JCO retraction

The Retraction Watch category for “lack of IRB approval” as a reason for retraction — a subject we covered in our most recent Lab Times column — is growing. First there were the 90-odd retractions by Joachim Boldt, then three by Australian researchers studying Aussie-rules football players. Now, we learn that the Journal of Clinical Oncology has retracted a paper over concerns that the authors failed to obtain ethical approval to conduct their study.

The 2010 publication, by researchers at Saitama Medical University in Japan, reported on an analysis of 314 lymphoma patients being treated with chemotherapy — some, and perhaps none, of whom knew they were being studied.

Here’s the notice, which appeared this month: Continue reading Lack of ethical approval leads to JCO retraction

Should authors have to retract papers based on data obtained unethically?

via Kent State http://bit.ly/r2CW44

Careful Retraction Watch readers may have noticed that one of the categories in our right-hand column under “by reason for retraction” is “lack of IRB approval.” That’s because in just over a year, we’ve written a number of posts about two cases of retractions for that reason.

One was the now-infamous case of Joachim Boldt, who has retracted some 90 papers. The other was more mundane, about a group studying injuries among Aussie rules football players. 

These retractions — and another case in which lung cancer screening trial investigators have said 90 percent of their consent forms are unobtainable, according to The Cancer Letter and The New York Times — raise some important ethical questions that we explore in our latest LabTimes column. Excerpt: Continue reading Should authors have to retract papers based on data obtained unethically?

Another retraction of IRB-free paper from Aussie sports medicine group

There’s another retraction from the Australian researchers who failed to obtain institutional review board (IRB) approval for their studies of rugby players and footballers.

The 2010 paper, in BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders — which had already retracted two other articles from the group — was titled “The effect of a sports chiropractic manual therapy intervention on the prevention of back pain, hamstring and lower limb injuries in semi-elite Australian Rules footballers: A randomized controlled trial.”

The editor of the journal had added this comment to the PDFs associated with the paper on August 3, a day after our post on the previous two retractions: Continue reading Another retraction of IRB-free paper from Aussie sports medicine group

A dingo ate my IRB form: Journal cries foul over Aussie-rules football and rugby papers that lied

Toronto Dingos, photo by Ovesny Navarro http://bit.ly/nRirhi

If there’s any group of subjects a scientist wouldn’t want to piss off, it would have to be Aussie-rules football and rugby players, who are tough enough to make a saltwater crocodile wish it was a belt.  And when those guinea pigs are suffering from low back pain — well, we shudder to think.

The journal BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders has retracted two papers from a group of Australian researchers who appear to have lied about having received IRB approval for their studies of back pain in rough-sport athletes.

According to the first notice, for “Low back pain status in elite and semi-elite Australian football codes: a cross-sectional survey of football (soccer), Australian-Rules, rugby league, rugby union and non-athletic controls:” Continue reading A dingo ate my IRB form: Journal cries foul over Aussie-rules football and rugby papers that lied