Search Results for: sting

Some posts you may have missed: Impressive amounts of plagiarism; PhD revocation; a poll, and more

Dear Retraction Watch readers: Those of you signed up for our emails for every post may have wondered why we haven’t sent you any emails since Saturday. Well, it wasn’t because we didn’t want to. We had a technical glitch, which we’ve now fixed. Apologies for that, and here are links to the posts that … Continue reading Some posts you may have missed: Impressive amounts of plagiarism; PhD revocation; a poll, and more

What does “reproducibility” mean? New paper seeks to standardize the lexicon

What is the difference between “reproducible” and “replicable”? And how does each relate to results that are “generalizable” and “robust”? Researchers are using these terms interchangeably, creating confusion over what exactly is needed to confirm a scientific result, argues a new paper published today in Science Translational Medicine. Here’s how the US National Science Foundation (NSF) … Continue reading What does “reproducibility” mean? New paper seeks to standardize the lexicon

Paper reports data from PET/CT scan, years before it arrived

Authors have retracted a study just three months after publishing it, upon realizing they made “several critical errors.” For one, the authors didn’t actually collect the data they claim to in the title of the paper, which reported on methods to screen patients for recurrence of lung cancer. The authors included data from positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT), … Continue reading Paper reports data from PET/CT scan, years before it arrived

Weekend reads: Improper influence by NFL; dissertations for sale; how common is failure to reproduce?

The week at Retraction Watch featured controversy over an economics paper, and a report of a researcher who faked more than 70 experiments. Here’s what was happening elsewhere:

Science names new editor-in-chief

Science has a new editor-in-chief. As of July 1st, Jeremy M. Berg will be at the helm of the family of journals published by the American Association for the Advancement of Science, replacing Marcia McNutt. McNutt is leaving to become president of the National Academy of Sciences. Berg, now associate senior vice chancellor for science strategy and planning … Continue reading Science names new editor-in-chief

Editors say they missed “fairly obvious clues” of third party tampering, publish fake peer reviews

The editors of a journal that recently retracted a paper after the peer-review process was “compromised” have published the fake reviews, along with additional details about the case. In the editorial titled “Organised crime against the academic peer review system,” Adam Cohen and other editors at the British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology say they missed “several fairly obvious … Continue reading Editors say they missed “fairly obvious clues” of third party tampering, publish fake peer reviews

Dutch university ordered to pay economist after she was accused of plagiarism

A court in the Netherlands has fined Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam (VU) 7,500 euros to compensate for “immaterial damage” to an economist accused of plagiarism. Karima Kourtit, a researcher at VU, has been at the receiving end of anonymous complaints to her institution accusing her of plagiarism and her professor, high-profile economist Peter Nijkamp, of duplication (i.e. self-plagiarism). … Continue reading Dutch university ordered to pay economist after she was accused of plagiarism

Retractions aren’t enough: Why science has bigger problems

Scientific fraud isn’t what keeps Andrew Gelman, a professor of statistics at Columbia University in New York, up at night. Rather, it’s the sheer number of unreliable studies — uncorrected, unretracted — that have littered the literature. He tells us more, below. Whatever the vast majority of retractions are, they’re a tiny fraction of the number … Continue reading Retractions aren’t enough: Why science has bigger problems

Journal pulls parasite paper over potential for patient harm

A journal has retracted a paper about a molecular diagnosis for leishmaniasis out of concern it could lead to incorrect clinical diagnoses.  According to Parasitology Research, all data behind the figures in the main manuscript and supporting information are correct, but the authors’ misinterpretation of the data could lead doctors to diagnose patients incorrectly.  Let’s take a … Continue reading Journal pulls parasite paper over potential for patient harm

In precedent break, BMJ explains why it rejected controversial “weekend effect” paper

After the reviewer of a rejected paper was publicly outed, the BMJ has taken the unusual step of explaining why it chose not to publish the paper. The paper — eventually published in another journal — raised hackles for suggesting that there is no “weekend effect,” or a higher mortality rate in hospitals on Saturday … Continue reading In precedent break, BMJ explains why it rejected controversial “weekend effect” paper