Search Results for: medical

One in 25 papers contains inappropriately duplicated images, screen finds

Elisabeth Bik, a microbiologist at Stanford, has for years been a behind-the-scenes force in scientific integrity, anonymously submitting reports on plagiarism and image duplication to journal editors. Now, she’s ready to come out of the shadows. With the help of two editors at microbiology journals, she has conducted a massive study looking for image duplication … Continue reading One in 25 papers contains inappropriately duplicated images, screen finds

Three HER2-cancer review papers tagged with expressions of concern

The Oncologist has tagged three review papers that share a first author with an expression of concern. The three papers, which have together been cited more than 1,000 times, focus on HER2, a gene that can contribute to breast cancer. Though the papers contain errors, the conclusions — about how the HER2 gene serves as … Continue reading Three HER2-cancer review papers tagged with expressions of concern

Do interventions to reduce misconduct actually work? Maybe not, says new report

Can we teach good behavior in the lab? That’s the premise behind a number of interventions aimed at improving research integrity, invested in by universities across the world and even private companies. Trouble is, a new review from the Cochrane Library shows that there is little good evidence to show these interventions work. We spoke … Continue reading Do interventions to reduce misconduct actually work? Maybe not, says new report

Weekend reads: Disney retraction request; NEJM under fire; how to fight unfavorable reviews

The week at Retraction Watch featured the retraction of a hoax article from a philosophy journal and an image in a paper that looked familiar because it was from a catalog. Here’s what was happening elsewhere:

Does this scientific image look familiar? It’s from a catalog

There’s something strange about a 2008 paper on the role of nicotine receptors in promoting lung cancer: One of the western blot analyses looks like a version of an image from a commercial catalog. A commenter on PubPeer pointed out the similarities between an image in “Role of α7-nicotinic acetylcholine receptor in human non-small cell lung cancer proliferation,” which was published in Cell … Continue reading Does this scientific image look familiar? It’s from a catalog

Authors pull 14-year-old paper from PNAS over concerns of fabrication

Authors have retracted a 2002 paper from PNAS because part of a figure “may have been fabricated,” and they no longer have the original data to prove otherwise. The paper in question, “Deficient Smad7 expression: A putative molecular defect in scleroderma,” studied the signaling pathways that may underlie the autoimmune disease. It has been cited 198 times, according … Continue reading Authors pull 14-year-old paper from PNAS over concerns of fabrication

Neuroscientist pleads guilty in court to fraud, gets two-year suspended sentence

A Parkinson’s researcher pleaded guilty to fraud in court this morning in Brisbane, Australia, and received a two-year suspended sentence. Court sentences for fraud are rare, to say the least. This one follows an investigation by Bruce Murdoch‘s former employer, the University of Queensland, into 92 papers — resulting in the retraction of three papers co-authored by Caroline Barwood, … Continue reading Neuroscientist pleads guilty in court to fraud, gets two-year suspended sentence

Son sees dead father in case report, requests retraction

Authors have retracted a case report describing a surgery to remove gallstones in a patient with Crohn’s disease after learning they’d mixed up two cases, and instead reported on a patient who had died 21 days after the procedure. We were alerted to this story by La Repubblica, and contacted by the son of the patient … Continue reading Son sees dead father in case report, requests retraction

Weekend reads: Fraudster rises again as filmmaker; Elsevier, open access publisher?; unethical ethics research

The week at Retraction Watch featured the retraction of a paper on the potential dangers of Wi-Fi, and our 3,000th post. Also, have you taken our survey? Here’s what was happening elsewhere:

NFL and NYT collide: Did studies on concussion rates leave out necessary data?

The National Football League failed to include data from diagnosed concussions in peer-reviewed studies, making the sport look safer than it is, allege the results of an investigation published yesterday in the New York Times. Now, the paper and the NFL are arguing over whether the studies were supposed to include every instance of head injury. … Continue reading NFL and NYT collide: Did studies on concussion rates leave out necessary data?