Search Results for: medical

Where I think Retraction Watch went wrong: A guest post from Paolo Macchiarini

We are pleased to present a guest post by Paolo Macchiarini, a surgeon best known for pioneering the creation of tracheas from cadavers and patients’ own stem cells. Macchiarini has faced some harsh criticisms over the years, including accusations of downplaying the risks of the procedure and not obtaining proper consent. We have covered the investigation, including … Continue reading Where I think Retraction Watch went wrong: A guest post from Paolo Macchiarini

Journal bans authors of duplicated asthma paper

A common ailment known as duplication has taken down a paper about a common fungus and asthma. Aspergillus spores are often ubiquitous yet harmless, but can irritate people whose lungs aren’t in top working order. Duplication, on the other hand, is more universally deadly. The editors of The Pan African Medical Journal told us that, in addition to the retraction, there … Continue reading Journal bans authors of duplicated asthma paper

There’s “no evidence” research was conducted at all in retracted cancer paper

To one reader of a paper on a nerve cancer, the researchers, based at a hospital in China, seemed to have found a very large number of cases of a rare cancer to study. That observation triggered an investigation into the paper that led to its retraction — and the concern that the authors in the paper never did … Continue reading There’s “no evidence” research was conducted at all in retracted cancer paper

Publisher bans authors for apparent plagiarism

Three authors have been banned from journals published by IGM Publication, including the Journal of Medical Science and Clinical Research. The ban — a relatively infrequent occurrence in publishing — comes after the publisher removed a 2014 article that seems to have merely changed the title and authors of a 2013 article  from another journal. When … Continue reading Publisher bans authors for apparent plagiarism

“Rigging of the peer-review process” kills parasite paper

A paper on nematode parasites appears to have been infected with a nasty strain of a publishing problem known as fake peer review. By our count, the phenomenon has felled approximately 250 papers in total. The affected review, “The important role of matrix metalloproteinases in nematode parasites,” explores a type of enzyme secreted by the parasite. Published … Continue reading “Rigging of the peer-review process” kills parasite paper

Predatory journals published 400,000 papers in 2014: Report

The number of so-called “predatory” open-access journals that allegedly sidestep publishing standards in order to make money off of article processing charges has dramatically expanded in recent years, and three-quarters of authors are based in either Asia or Africa, according to a new analysis from BMC Medicine.* The number of articles published by predatory journals spiked … Continue reading Predatory journals published 400,000 papers in 2014: Report

Should peer review be open, and rely less on author-picked reviewers? Study says…

After reviewing hundreds of peer review reports from three journals, authors representing publishers BioMed Central and Springer suggest there may be some benefits to using “open” peer review — where both authors and reviewers reveal their identity — and not relying on reviewers hand-picked by the authors themselves. But the conclusions are nuanced — they found … Continue reading Should peer review be open, and rely less on author-picked reviewers? Study says…

Following criticism, BMJ “clarifies” dietary guidelines investigation

The BMJ has issued two “clarifications” to an investigation it published last week that questioned whether the new U.S. dietary guidelines were evidence-based. The article criticized several aspects of the new dietary guidelines, such as “deleting meat from the list of foods recommended as part of its healthy diets” — without, according to author Nina Teicholz, reviewing the scientific literature … Continue reading Following criticism, BMJ “clarifies” dietary guidelines investigation

Weekend reads: STAP saga over once and for all?; plagiarizing prof gets tenure

The week at Retraction Watch featured the appeal of a modern-day retraction, and a look at whether a retraction by a Nobel Prize winner should be retracted 50 years later. Here’s what was happening elsewhere:

Here’s how to keep clinical trial participants honest (and why that’s a big deal)

Additional lab tests, creating a clinical trial patient registry, and rewards for honesty are among the advice doled out in this week’s issue of the New England Journal of Medicine for researchers to help avoid the major issue of participants lying to get into clinical trials. In the Perspective, David B. Resnik and David J. McCann, … Continue reading Here’s how to keep clinical trial participants honest (and why that’s a big deal)