Category: by reason for retraction

Too much skin in the game, as duplications force retraction of psoriasis paper

actadermA group of dermatology researchers from Egypt who passed around a psoriasis paper like a bottle of sunscreen at the beach have been burned (sorry) by a journal that caught them in the act.

Acta Dermatovenerologica Alpina, Pannonica et Adriatica is retracting the 2009 article “Association of cytokine gene polymorphisms with psoriasis in cases from the Nile Delta of Egypt” after discovering that they were far from the first publication to print the paper.

Here’s the retraction notice (it’s a pdf): Continue reading Too much skin in the game, as duplications force retraction of psoriasis paper

Math paper retracted because it “contains some ethical problems”

inequalThe Journal of of Inequalities and Applications has retracted a paper for unspecified “ethical problems.”

Here’s the notice for “Strong Limiting Behavior in Binary Search Trees:” Continue reading Math paper retracted because it “contains some ethical problems”

Chemistry papers retracted for “lack of objectivity:” The authors did their own peer review

synthreactSynthesis and Reactivity in Inorganic, Metal-Organic, and Nano-Metal Chemistry is retracting three articles for duplication — redundancy the authors, chemical engineers at Islamic Azad University, in Shahreza, Iran, appear to have gotten around by reviewing their own manuscripts. But, if they did say so themselves, those papers were really something!

Here’s the retraction notice for two of the papers, both of which appeared in 2012 and which were cited seven times and once, respectively, according to Thomson Scientific’s Web of Knowledge:
Continue reading Chemistry papers retracted for “lack of objectivity:” The authors did their own peer review

Aussie university asks for retraction, investigates former neurology researcher for fraud

uqThe University of Queensland has decided to get out in front of a serious research misconduct scandal by issuing a press release about the item even before, well, we could get a hold of the story.

The affair involves Bruce Murdoch (all of his links at UQ are defunct), an expert in movement disorders such as Parkinson’s disease. Murdoch isn’t named in the release, but he is the corresponding author of the retracted paper, which is called out in the statement.

According to UQ, Murdoch seems to have published a paper in the European Journal of Neurology on research he never conducted — and on the basis of which he received a $20,000 grant. The paper has been cited six times, according to Thomson Scientific’s Web of Knowledge.

UQ has called for a retraction of the paper, although that does not appear to have happened yet.

Here’s the release, from Peter Høj, president and vice chancellor of the institution, in its entirety: Continue reading Aussie university asks for retraction, investigates former neurology researcher for fraud

Regrettable, but not scientifically dishonest: Klarlund Pedersen responds to Danish committee

Klarlund Pedersen
Klarlund Pedersen

A Danish researcher has responded to a draft report of the Danish Committees on Scientific Dishonesty (DCSD) that found she had acted in a “scientifically dishonest” and “grossly negligent” manner.

Bente Klarlund Pedersen, a University of Copenhagen researcher, has published with Milena Penkowa, four of whose papers have been retracted following investigations. In the press, she argued that while she had made mistakes, she had not committed misconduct.

The 57-page letter from Klarlund Pedersen’s attorney to the DCSD responds in detail to the critique of her work, including twelve papers. This passage from the summary gathers the arguments together: Continue reading Regrettable, but not scientifically dishonest: Klarlund Pedersen responds to Danish committee

Frontiers papers on GMO debate, diabetes retracted for improperly cited text

frontiers plantThe author of a review article on diabetes has been forced to retract the paper after it emerged that he failed to properly credit some of the text — an omission we generally associate with the word plagiarism.

The article, “Colonic flora, probiotics, obesity and diabetes,” was written by Paul Marik, of Eastern Virginia Medical School, and appeared in July 2012 in Frontiers in Endocrinology. It has been cited once, according to Thomson Scientific’s Web of Knowledge.

Here’s the retraction notice:

Continue reading Frontiers papers on GMO debate, diabetes retracted for improperly cited text

Journal retracts two papers after being caught manipulating citations

pibbEarlier this week, in a story by Richard van Noorden, Nature revealed the hidden workings of a scheme referred to as “citation stacking” that has landed a number of journals in trouble. The story begins:

Mauricio Rocha-e-Silva thought that he had spotted an easy way to raise the profiles of Brazilian journals. From 2009, he and several other editors published articles containing hundreds of references to papers in each others’ journals — in order, he says, to elevate the journals’ impact factors.

As Nature reports, Rocha-e-Silva was apparently frustrated that Brazilian government agencies were relying heavily on impact factor to evaluate graduate programs. That meant few scientists were willing to publish in Brazilian journals, which had lower impact factors. Rocha-e-Silva describes some of these frustrations in an impassioned 2009 editorial (in Portuguese). Continue reading Journal retracts two papers after being caught manipulating citations

Figure error forces retraction of transgenic chickpea paper

pcrcoverThe humble chickpea has become one of the world’s most promising cash crops, so it’s no surprise that efforts are underway to make it even more humble, er, profitable, through genetic manipulation.

But one group of scientists made hummus out of their approach when they botched what evidently was a key element of a figure in their 2011 paper in Plant Cell Reports (PCR).

The article, “High-efficiency Agrobacterium-mediated transformation of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) and regeneration of insect-resistant transgenic plants,” came from researchers at the National Botanical Research Institute in Lucknow, India. Cited three times, according to Thomson Scientific’s Web of Knowledge, it purported to find that: Continue reading Figure error forces retraction of transgenic chickpea paper

Doing the right thing: Researchers retract two studies when they realize they misinterpreted data

protein scienceWhat do you do when new experiments show that you interpreted the data from your old experiments the wrong way?

Some scientists might just shrug and sweep those errors — and their previous papers — under the rug. But when it happened to Jeffery Kelly, of the Scripps Research Institute, and his colleagues, they decided to retract their earlier work.

Here’s the abstract of their new paper (we bolded a few sentences for emphasis): Continue reading Doing the right thing: Researchers retract two studies when they realize they misinterpreted data

Journal retracts IVF paper over data concerns

jargThe Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics has retracted a 2010 paper by a group of Iranian researchers after concluding that the authors may have misrepresented both the nature of the study and the originality of the work.

The article, “Can fresh embryo transfers be replaced by cryopreserved-thawed embryo transfers in assisted reproductive cycles? A randomized controlled trial,” came from Abbas Aflatoonian, Homa Oskouian, Shahnaz Ahmadi and Leila Oskouian at Yazd Research & Clinical Center for Infertility at Shahid Sadoughi University of Medical Science. According to the abstract: Continue reading Journal retracts IVF paper over data concerns