A cardiology researcher in Illinois coerced trainees to fake the results of a heart test so that patients would qualify to enter a clinical trial, according to a new finding by the Office of Research Integrity (ORI). Here’s an excerpt from the ORI’s notice about Parag V. Patel, of Advocate Lutheran General Hospital, in Park … Continue reading Researcher intimidated trainees into faking heart test results: ORI
Gentle readers: Since August of 2010 when we launched Retraction Watch, you’ve showed us plenty of love, for which we are ever grateful. Your encouragement, story tips, and critiques are what make the site what it is. It’s great to know that we are providing you with a valuable source of information that has helped … Continue reading Dear Retraction Watch readers: We want to grow. Here’s how you can help
Gentle readers: Since August of 2010 when we launched Retraction Watch, you’ve showed us plenty of love, for which we are ever grateful. Your encouragement, story tips, and critiques are what make the site what it is. It’s great to know that we are providing you with a valuable source of information that has helped … Continue reading How you can support Retraction Watch
Retraction Watch readers may recall that in November, we, along with Automattic, the company behind WordPress, filed a lawsuit against someone who filed a false copyright infringement claim about ten of our posts. On a false pretense — copying and pasting the posts onto a website in India, then claiming that we had plagiarized that … Continue reading Fight against false copyright claims goes to Capitol Hill
Retraction Watch readers will likely be familiar with the story of Paul Brookes, the University of Rochester researcher whose identity as the person behind Science-Fraud.org was revealed in January 2013. That revelation — and legal threats — forced Brookes to shutter Science-Fraud.org. In a new illuminating interview in Science, Brookes discusses the legal threats he … Continue reading So what happened after Paul Brookes was forced to shut down Science-Fraud.org?
A group of authors in Korea has lost their 2013 paper on treating vision loss after one of the two cases they’d reported turned out to have been fatally flawed. The paper, “Isolated central retinal artery occlusion as an initial presentation of paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuria and successful long-term prevention of systemic thrombosis with eculizumab,” had … Continue reading “Critical data” errors force retraction of vision paper
Back in August we — and others — wrote about a paper in Organometallics for which one member of the study team appeared to have instructed a co-author to pad the article with artificial results. From the supplemental information (SI) of that paper: Emma, please insert NMR data here! where are they? and for this … Continue reading Authors of “just make up an…analysis” Organometallics paper issue mega-correction
We have an update on the story of 120 bogus papers being removed by IEEE and Springer. The latter posted a statement earlier today, which we include in its entirety below:
A group of bird researchers in Korea has lost their 2006 paper on DNA barcoding of that country’s avian species because they feathered the article with material from others. The paper, “DNA barcoding Korean birds,” appeared in Molecules and Cells, published by Springer for the Korean Society for Molecular and Cellular Biology and has been … Continue reading Clone call for bird gene bar-coding paper
Time for another installment of Ask Retraction Watch: Let’s say I’m collecting relevant papers to write a review, or preparing a project, and I have rather limited time. I find a few interesting papers, bump into some paywalls, ask the authors for the .pdf without any response, and finally I decide to pay, say, $20 … Continue reading Should readers get a refund when they pay to access seriously flawed papers?