Weekend reads: Ivermectin study retracted; Sci-Hub and citations; animal welfare violations at chinchilla lab supplier

Before we present this week’s Weekend Reads, a question: Do you enjoy our weekly roundup? If so, we could really use your help. Would you consider a tax-deductible donation to support Weekend Reads, and our daily work? Thanks in advance.

The week at Retraction Watch featured:

Our list of retracted or withdrawn COVID-19 papers is up to 144.

Here’s what was happening elsewhere (some of these items may be paywalled, metered access, or require free registration to read):

Continue reading Weekend reads: Ivermectin study retracted; Sci-Hub and citations; animal welfare violations at chinchilla lab supplier

JAMA journal retracts paper on masks for children

Harald Walach

JAMA Pediatrics has retracted a paper claiming that children’s masks trap too-high concentrations of carbon dioxide a little more than two weeks after publishing it.

The paper, by Harald Walach and colleagues, came under fire immediately after it was published on June 30, and quickly earned an editor’s note. Walach had another paper — which claimed that COVID-19 vaccines caused two deaths for every three deaths they prevented — retracted just a few days later. He also lost an affiliation with a university in Poland.

Walach and his colleagues responded to critics of the JAMA Pediatrics paper earlier this month, as we reported. But the journals apparently found that response wanting, according to the retraction notice:

Continue reading JAMA journal retracts paper on masks for children

‘Please don’t be afraid to talk about your errors and to correct them.’

Joana Grave

A “systematic error” in a mental health database has led to the retraction of a 2017 paper on how people with psychosis process facial expressions.

Joana Grave, a PhD student at the University of Aveiro, in Portugal, and her colleagues published their article, “The effects of perceptual load in processing emotional facial expression in psychotic disorders,” in Psychiatry Research, an Elsevier title. 

According to the abstract of the paper: 

Continue reading ‘Please don’t be afraid to talk about your errors and to correct them.’

Paper from company claiming phototherapy could treat COVID-19 is retracted

A study that touted phototherapy as a way to combat the COVID-19 pandemic has been retracted after Elisabeth Bik noted a litany of concerns about the article, from duplications in the figures to the authors’ failure to disclose conflicts of interest. 

The article, “Methylene blue photochemical treatment as a reliable SARS-CoV-2 plasma virus inactivation method for blood safety and convalescent plasma therapy for COVID-19,” appeared in mid-April in BMC Infectious Diseases, a Springer Nature title. Unlike many papers rushed into publication during the pandemic, it had been in peer review since the previous April. The authors listed affiliations with various institutions in China, including a company called Boxin (Beijing) Biotechnology Development LTD, which helped fund the study — more on that in a moment. 

According to the paper, methylene blue (a versatile medical product that serves as a drug and a dye) when used with something called the “BX-1 AIDS treatment instrument,” could be a wonder therapy for the SARS-CoV-2 infection. 

The authors describe BX-1 as: 

Continue reading Paper from company claiming phototherapy could treat COVID-19 is retracted

Researcher committed misconduct while at NIH, say institutes — but is allowed to publish a revised version of a paper

An investigation by the National Institutes of Health has led to the retraction of a 2016 paper in PLOS Biology for manipulation of the data in the article. But the journal has republished a revised version of the paper — minus the bad data — on which the researcher found to have committed the misconduct remains the first author. 

The original article, “Exosomes Mediate LTB4 Release during Neutrophil Chemotaxis,” came from the laboratory of Carole Parent, who was a cancer researcher at the NIH at the time it was published and is now at the University of Michigan, in Ann Arbor. It has been cited 93 times, according to Clarivate Analytics’ Web of Science.

According to the notice: 

Continue reading Researcher committed misconduct while at NIH, say institutes — but is allowed to publish a revised version of a paper

‘In hindsight the mistake was quite stupid’: Authors retract paper on stroke

File this under “doing the right thing:” A group of stroke researchers in Germany have retracted a paper they published earlier this year after finding an error in their work shortly after publication that doomed the findings. 

Julian Klingbeil, of the Department of Neurology at the University of Leipzig Medical Center, and his colleagues had been looking at how the location of lesions in the brain left behind by cerebral strokes were associated with the onset of depression after the attacks. According to the study, “Association of Lesion Location and Depressive Symptoms Poststroke”:

Continue reading ‘In hindsight the mistake was quite stupid’: Authors retract paper on stroke

Elsevier says “integrity and rigor” of peer review for 400 papers fell “beneath the high standards expected”

Elsevier says it is reassessing its procedures for special issues after one of its journals issued expressions of concern for six such publications, involving as many as 400 articles, over worries that the peer review process was compromised. 

The journal, Microprocessors & Microsystems, published the special issues using guest editors.  

The EoCs vary slightly, but the journal has issued the following blanket statement for these six issues:

Continue reading Elsevier says “integrity and rigor” of peer review for 400 papers fell “beneath the high standards expected”

Weekend reads: How many scientists commit misconduct?; science ‘moved beyond peer review during the pandemic’; Juul pays for entire journal issue

Before we present this week’s Weekend Reads, a question: Do you enjoy our weekly roundup? If so, we could really use your help. Would you consider a tax-deductible donation to support Weekend Reads, and our daily work? Thanks in advance.

The week at Retraction Watch featured:

Our list of retracted or withdrawn COVID-19 papers is up to 139.

Here’s what was happening elsewhere (some of these items may be paywalled, metered access, or require free registration to read):

Continue reading Weekend reads: How many scientists commit misconduct?; science ‘moved beyond peer review during the pandemic’; Juul pays for entire journal issue

‘They seem to mean business’: Cardiology journal flags papers cited hundreds of times

A European cardiology journal has issued expressions of concern for seven widely-cited papers dating back to 2009 after a reader flagged suspicious images in the articles. 

Although the cast of characters changes, the senior author on all seven papers is Chao-Ke Tang, of the First Affiliated Hospital of the University of South China, in Hengyang, Hunan. To date, at least 15 of Tang’s papers have come under scrutiny on PubPeer. Two months ago, for example, Elisabeth Bik posted about “unexpected similarities” in multiple figures in a 2013 paper by Tang and colleagues that appeared in PLoS ONE.  

But Sander Kersten,  the chair of Nutrition, Metabolism and Genomics and Division of Human Nutrition and Health at Wageningen University in The Netherlands, said he believes that the researcher’s output for roughly the past decade is unreliable. 

Kersten said his concerns about Tang date back to 2014, when he reviewed — negatively — a manuscript for Atherosclerosis, an Elsevier title, from the researcher: 

Continue reading ‘They seem to mean business’: Cardiology journal flags papers cited hundreds of times

Authors of widely panned study of masks in children respond to critics

Harald Walach

The authors of a paper claiming that children’s masks trap concentrations of carbon dioxide higher than allowable standards in Germany have responded to critics who said the study was plagued with poor methods and unreasonable conclusions.

As we reported earlier this week, the corresponding author of the paper, Harald Walach, had his affiliation with Poznan University in Poland terminated because of a different paper he had co-authored, in the journal Vaccines. That paper has been retracted.

In the response, which we’ve made available in full here, Walach and his co-authors on the masks paper in JAMA Pediatrics write that

Continue reading Authors of widely panned study of masks in children respond to critics