Search Results for: medical

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)

Lesson learned: “What makes a journal great?” essay pulled for plagiarism

In 2011, a Nigerian journal published an essay entitled “What Makes a Journal Great” by its newly appointed editor, outlining his editorial philosophy — a philosophy that apparently includes lifting text from another source. That’s right — the Nigerian Medical Journal is now retracting the essay by Francis A. Uba, a surgeon who currently is provost of the … Continue reading Lesson learned: “What makes a journal great?” essay pulled for plagiarism

Anti-fish oil researcher netted two more retractions

Earlier this year, Food and Nutrition Sciences retracted two papers from an author who criticized highly popular fish oil supplements after an additional round of peer review concluded his papers present a “biased interpretation,” among other issues. Last year, Brian Peskin lost a paper for an “undeclared competing interest” — namely, that he held patents and directed a … Continue reading Anti-fish oil researcher netted two more retractions

Years after papers were withdrawn, JBC issues notices

The Journal of Biological Chemistry has posted withdrawal notices for six papers that had already been withdrawn, some more than a decade ago, in an effort to resolve “PubMed indexing problems.” Each paper had been pulled by the author before it appeared in print, but still appeared online on the the journal’s website and in PubMed.  … Continue reading Years after papers were withdrawn, JBC issues notices

Plant paper pulled when authors can’t pay fees

A paper on chicory plants — also known as “blue daisies” — won’t get its moment in the sun. The “accepted author version” was published online in June, in Plant Signaling & Behavior. But before the so-called “version of record” could make it into an official issue of the journal — which is online-only — it was retracted. Why? The authors … Continue reading Plant paper pulled when authors can’t pay fees

Cancer drug paper nulled by “statistical errors”

Researchers have pulled a paper about a drug used to treat pancreatic tumors due to “statistical errors.” The 2014 paper suggested a drug that appears to treat pancreatic tumors also works in Chinese patients. We’re not exactly sure what went wrong with “A randomized phase II study of everolimus for advanced pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors in Chinese patients,” however, because … Continue reading Cancer drug paper nulled by “statistical errors”

Weekend reads: Journal invents time machine; endless author lists; is nuance overrated?

The week at Retraction Watch featured the unmasking of the people behind PubPeer, and an editor doing the right thing following a high-profile retraction. Here’s what was happening elsewhere: