by reason for retraction – Page 257

Australian university to repay $275K grant because of “misleading and incorrect” information

Courtesy of The Australian, we have an update on a story we first covered in late 2012.

A contested retraction in Stem Cells and Development has left the Queensland University of Technology (QUT) graduate student who fought for it in limbo, uncertain if he will earn his PhD. And many of those who didn’t want the paper retracted have a significant financial interest in a company whose work was promoted by the research — despite any lack of disclosure in the now-retracted paper.

QUT refused to give the student, Luke Cormack, access to an evaluation of the data in question, but also said that it welcomed an independent probe into a related $275,000 grant.

That probe is now complete, reports The Australian’s Julie Hare, and the QUT will be paying the grant back: Continue reading Australian university to repay $275K grant because of “misleading and incorrect” information

Second retraction appears for former University of Florida ob-gyn subject to ORI probe

Nasser Chegini, an ob-gyn formerly on the faculty at the University of Florida who has been the subject of an Office of Research Integrity (ORI) inquiry for several years, has a second retraction.

Chegini is suspected of having used bogus data in some of his work — research backed in part by some $4 million in federal funding.

The new retraction involves a 2008 paper in Reproductive Sciences on which Chegini was senior author. Here’s the notice: Continue reading Second retraction appears for former University of Florida ob-gyn subject to ORI probe

Déjà vu: Double pub in the same issue earns a retraction

Always do a careful reading of your galleys, editors.

We imagine readers of Biomedical Chromatography’s special issue, “Reminiscences of Chang Kee Lim,” did some flipping back and forth when they found the same paper published twice.

Here’s the resulting notice for “Determination of 4-hydroxy-2-nonenal in serum by high-performance liquid chromatography with fluorescence detection after pre-column derivatization using 4-(N,N-dimethylaminosulfonyl)-7-hydrazino-2,1,3-benzoxadiazole”: Continue reading Déjà vu: Double pub in the same issue earns a retraction

Cancer researcher has correction upgraded to retraction

Rakesh Kumar, a researcher with six recent corrections and one retraction, has had one of those corrections upgraded to a retraction.

Here’s the unhelpful notice, from Molecular Endocrinology: Continue reading Cancer researcher has correction upgraded to retraction

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

The 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

“Our jaws hit the floor!!” Researchers say authors doctored images for rebuttal letter

Try to follow along on this one. We think it’s worth it.

The authors of a letter replying to a comment in a urology journal have retracted their response because it contained inappropriate figures. At least, that’s the official story.

The original paper, “Effect of a Risk-stratified Grade of Nerve-sparing Technique on Early Return of Continence After Robot-assisted Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy,” came from a group at Weill Medical College of Cornell University led by Ashutosh Tewari. Published in July 2012 in European Urology, it purported to find that: Continue reading “Our jaws hit the floor!!” Researchers say authors doctored images for rebuttal letter

Incomplete reference helps editor find duplicate paper — and retract article

Pro-tip: If you’re going to try to publish your work twice, don’t give editors a reason to go searching the internet for your previous work.

Here’s case in point, a retraction notice from the Botswana Journal of Agriculture & Applied Sciences: Continue reading Incomplete reference helps editor find duplicate paper — and retract article

Wasted breath: Cribbing earns retraction of anesthesia paper

The authors of a paper on anesthetic waste gases in the operating room have pulled the article for plagiarism.

The paper, titled “Further Pieces of Evidence to the Pulmonary Origin of Sevoflurane Escaping to the Operating Room During General Anaesthesia,” appeared in Cell Biochemistry and Biophysics and came from a group at various institutions in Harbin, China.

But according to the retraction notice, the further pieces weren’t really further, after all:
Continue reading Wasted breath: Cribbing earns retraction of anesthesia paper

New method sinks newish paper…or does it?

The timing on a recent retraction of a paper from Biotechnology and Bioengineering makes it a bit difficult to figure out what happened, but here’s a try.

An article first published online May 16th by a group of researchers at Brown University was retracted on June 1st, apparently because a new and better method for analyzing the data was developed…at some point.

The timeline is not exactly clear from the retraction, though we’ve reached out to the author and publisher and will update with any new information.

Here’s the (paywalled) notice for “High-level production of 3-hydroxypropionatein Escherichia coli and Saccharomyces cerevisiae by introducing part of the 3-hydroxypropionate/4-hydroxybutyrate cycle from Metallosphaera sedula”:

Continue reading New method sinks newish paper…or does it?