Robert Getzenberg, a former Hopkins and Pitt cancer researcher, has retracted another paper, his seventh.
Here’s the notice for “Highly specific urine-based marker of bladder cancer,” a paper first published in Urology in 2005: Continue reading Oncology researcher Getzenberg notches seventh retraction
The International Journal of Biochemistry & Cell Biology has retracted a 2013 paper by a group from China after learning that only the first author knew about the article.
The paper was titled “Construction of circular miRNA sponges targeting miR-21 or miR-221 and demonstration of their excellent anticancer effects on malignant melanoma cells,” and it was led by Yuchen Liu. Liu’s affiliations include the Institute of Dermatology and Department of Dermatology at No. 1 Hospital, part of Anhui Medical University, and the State Key Laboratory Incubation Base of Dermatology for the Ministry of National Science and Technology.
Here’s the retraction notice:
Continue reading Forged authorship sinks melanoma paper
Hiroaki Matsubara, a former Kyoto Prefectural University cardiology researcher who resigned last year following an investigation, has had another paper retracted, his ninth.
Here’s the notice from Arteriosclerosis, Thrombosis, and Vascular Biology: Continue reading Ninth retraction appears for cardiology researcher Matsubara
Dirk Smeesters, the former Erasmus University psychology researcher found to have committed misconduct, is up to half a dozen retractions.
Both notices, in the Journal of Consumer Research, where Smeesters has already had one retraction, are paywalled. Here’s one, for a paper cited seven times, according to Thomson Scientific’s Web of Knowledge: Continue reading “Blameworthy inaccuracies:” Dirk Smeesters up to six retractions
The authors of a 2012 paper in the Journal of Neuroimmunology have retracted the paper after some of the researchers were unable to verify the findings in follow-up work.
The article, “Association of transforming growth factor beta-1 (TGFB1) regulatory region polymorphisms with myasthenia gravis-related ophthalmoparesis,” came from a lab at Groote Schuur Hospital and the University of Cape Town, in South Africa.
According to the abstract: Continue reading Nothing to see here: Unreplicable eye paper ends in retraction
The 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
It’s not unusual for us to hear allegations that journals have caved to corporate demands that they retract papers. And companies have certainly objected to the publication of results that painted their products in an unflattering light.
Continue reading Stunner: Researchers retract paper because company complains it’s hurting profits
Last 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
A group of researchers in Singapore has lost two 2013 articles in BMJ Supportive & Palliative Care for problems with their data.
One of the articles was titled “Patients with Dysphagia: Encounters in Taking Medication;” the other, “Issues Associated with Delirium Severity Among Older Patients.” In both cases, the first and second authors were Rajaram S and Chua HC, of Khoo Teck Puat Hospital.
According to the retraction notices:
Continue reading Data “irregularities” prompt retraction of palliative care papers
Jens Förster, the Dutch social psychologist accused of misconduct, has posted an open letter on his lab’s website in which he denies wrongdoing.
The letter, in English and dated May 11, offers a detailed rebuttal to the investigation’s conclusions. It also offers a rationale for Förster’s decision not to post his data on the Internet. And it’s followed by a briefer letter from Nira Liberman, who identifies herself as a collaborator of Förster’s.
We present the letter in full below:
Continue reading “I never manipulated data”: Förster defends actions in open letter