Search Results for: nature

What publishers and countries do most retractions for fake peer review come from?

A new analysis — which included scanning Retraction Watch posts — has identified some trends in papers pulled for fake peer review, a subject we’ve covered at length. For those who aren’t familiar, fake reviews arise when researchers associated with the paper in question (most often authors) create email addresses for reviewers, enabling them to … Continue reading What publishers and countries do most retractions for fake peer review come from?

Yes, “power pose” study is flawed, but shouldn’t be retracted, says one author

After the first author of a debated study about the benefits of positioning your body in an assertive ways — the so-called “power pose” — posted her concerns about the research, she has told us she does not believe the paper should be retracted. As reported by New York magazine, late last night, the first … Continue reading Yes, “power pose” study is flawed, but shouldn’t be retracted, says one author

Data were “fraudulently obtained” in epilepsy paper, probe finds

A brain research journal has retracted a 2016 study about epilepsy after an institutional investigation determined that some of the data were taken from another published paper. The retraction notice for the study — which appeared in Brain Research Bulletin — cites an investigation by the scientific integrity committee at Tongji University in Shanghai, China, … Continue reading Data were “fraudulently obtained” in epilepsy paper, probe finds

Weekend reads: World’s most prolific peer reviewer; replication backlash carries on; controversial PACE study re-analyzed

The week at Retraction Watch featured news of a fine for a doctor who took part in a controversial fake trial, and a likely unprecedented call for retraction by the U.S. FDA commissioner. Here’s what was happening elsewhere:

Author asks to retract nearly 20-year old paper over figure questions, lack of data

The last author of a 1999 paper has asked the journal to retract it less than one month after a user raised questions about images on PubPeer. Yesterday, last author Jim Woodgett posted a note on the site saying the author who generated the figures in question could not find the original data, and since … Continue reading Author asks to retract nearly 20-year old paper over figure questions, lack of data

Amid controversial Sarepta approval decision, FDA head calls for key study retraction

The head of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has called for the retraction of a study about a drug that the agency itself approved earlier this week, despite senior staff opposing the approval. On September 19, the FDA okayed eteplirsen to treat Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD), a rare genetic disorder that results in muscle degeneration and … Continue reading Amid controversial Sarepta approval decision, FDA head calls for key study retraction

What if scientists funded each other?

We were struck recently by a paper in Scientometrics that proposed a unique way to fund scientists: Distribute money equally, but require that each scientist donate a portion to others – turning the federal funding system into a crowd-sourcing venture that funds people instead of projects. The proposal could save the inordinate amount of time scientists … Continue reading What if scientists funded each other?

Authors retract 2016 cancer study when data don’t align with figures

Researchers have retracted a 2016 cancer study, citing discrepancies between the data and images presented in the paper.  Although the retraction notice itself contains relatively little information, we’ve obtained a letter from the last author — Jun-Li Luo of The Scripps Research Institute in Jupiter, Florida — to the editor-in-chief of Cell Death and Differentiation that says … Continue reading Authors retract 2016 cancer study when data don’t align with figures

Weekend reads: How to create tabloid science headlines; sugar industry buys research; the citation black market

The week at Retraction Watch featured a look at whether we have an epidemic of flawed meta-analyses, and the story of a strange case involving climate research and pseudonyms. Here’s what was happening elsewhere:

Columbia has settled a fraud case for $9.5M. Here’s why that’s important.

This summer, Columbia University signed a settlement agreement with the U.S. government over a case filed under the False Claims Act (FCA), which enables whistleblowers to sue institutions on behalf of the government. Although this may seem like one of the many legal issues facing academic science recently, this case merits a closer look, says … Continue reading Columbia has settled a fraud case for $9.5M. Here’s why that’s important.