Peer review isn’t a core subject of this blog. We leave that to the likes of Nature’s Peer-to-Peer, or even the Dilbert Blog. But it seems relevant to look at the peer review process for any clues about how retracted papers are making their way into press. We’re not here to defend peer review against … Continue reading Do peer reviewers get worse with experience? Plus a poll
It’s a busy week at Science. The journal is retracting a controversial paper about which it had previously expressed doubts, and has published an “Expression of Concern” about another article that looks like it might be headed for the same fate. First, the retraction. The move involves an October 2009 paper, on which we’ve previously … Continue reading Science plays two — a retraction, and concern issued about genetics papers
Last week, we noted a Nature editorial in which the journal came clean about its higher-than-average number of retractions this year — four. What we missed was the fact that the fourth retraction of the year also appeared in last week’s issue. The retraction, of a paper called “The large-conductance Ca2+-activated K+ channel is essential … Continue reading Previously questioned Nature paper on innate immunity retracted
In our very first post, we noted the case of Anil Potti, a Duke researcher who posed as a Rhodes Scholar and appears to have invented key statistical analyses in a study of how breast cancer responds to chemotherapy[.The case] has sent ripples of angst through the cancer community. Potti’s antics prompted editors of The … Continue reading A retraction in the Potti case?
The UK’s Research Integrity Office (UKRIO) has just published “Guidance for researchers on retractions in academic journals.” The document is an adaptation of existing guidelines by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), a UK charity. Nothing has changed, COPE chair Liz Wager told Retraction Watch. UKRIO just decided to convert COPE’s existing guidelines, targeted to … Continue reading UK government research watchdog publishes new retraction guidelines
Amy Wagers, an up and coming stem cell researcher at Harvard who made a name for herself as a postdoc early by questioning the work of others, has retracted a January 2010 paper she co-authored in Nature. According to the retraction: Three of the authors (J.L.S., F.S.K. and A.J.W.) wish to retract this Article after … Continue reading Highly cited Harvard stem cell scientist retracts Nature paper
Sometimes, apparently, a retraction isn’t enough to put research findings to bed forever. Consider this obituary recently posted online at the Journal of Pediatrics, for a method of detecting gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) in children: We commonly recognize the contributions of distinguished members of the pediatric community and, with regret, their passing. It is appropriate, … Continue reading Beyond retractions: A technique gets an obituary
Well, it’s happened: The Embargo Watch and Retraction Watch worlds have collided. I had initially figured on two posts here, but it soon became clear that how journals were handling these retractions, using embargoes, was central to both. So this is being cross-posted on both blogs. Linda Buck, who shared the 2004 Nobel Prize in … Continue reading Nobelist Linda Buck retracts two studies on olfactory networks — and the news is embargoed
Although Retraction Watch might have been born just before yesterday, we find it instructive to look back in time for items we would have covered had we been around a bit longer. We’ll do this periodically to generate a “Best Of” collection of retractions that catch our eye both for what they might suggest about … Continue reading Best Of Retractions, Part I: Water, water, everywhere, except in “Historical Palestine,” aka Israel
Last month, we wrote about the retraction of a 2005 paper suggesting that some adult stem cells might give rise to cancer. That, of course, would be a problem if researchers tried treating heart disease and other conditions with them. The paper’s authors retracted it, however, when it became clear that instead of being transformed … Continue reading Update on stem cell-cancer link retraction: Why not everyone signed, and why authors ended up in another journal first