Small problem: Nano-micro journal pulls diabetes paper with phony figure

Readers of this blog are aware that many of the retractions we’ve covered involve the misadventures of post-docs. That makes some superficial sense: post-docs, after all, are trainees, and therefore might be more likely to make mistakes. They’re also hungry to break into their chosen specialty, and how better to do that than by producing … Continue reading Small problem: Nano-micro journal pulls diabetes paper with phony figure

More on Anil Potti: Two other papers worth keeping an eye on

It’s fair to say that we haven’t heard the last of Anil Potti, the Duke cancer researcher who resigned last month following revelations that he had faked some of his results. Duke is still investigating the situation, and has also asked the Institute of Medicine to conduct its own study into the case and its … Continue reading More on Anil Potti: Two other papers worth keeping an eye on

Our computer ate the data: Expression of concern over blood thinner study raises concerns itself

Thrombosis and Haemostasis has issued an “expression of concern” over a 2004 paper by Tunisian researchers: Concerns have been raised by readers about the accuracy and validity of the data reported in the September 2004 article by Abdelkefi et al., entitled “Prevention of central venous line-related thrombosis by continuous infusion of low-dose unfractionated heparin, in … Continue reading Our computer ate the data: Expression of concern over blood thinner study raises concerns itself

Update on Ahluwalia fraud case: Researcher faked results, probably committed sabotage, says UCL

Earlier this month, we posted an item about the retraction of a 2004 Nature paper, “The large-conductance Ca2+-activated K+ channel is essential for innate immunity.” (That post was followed up with provocative comments from a researcher not affiliated with the authors, about what should happen to papers whose results can’t be replicated.) One of the … Continue reading Update on Ahluwalia fraud case: Researcher faked results, probably committed sabotage, says UCL

Do peer reviewers get worse with experience? Plus a poll

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

Duke’s Anil Potti resigns

Duke’s Anil Potti, the Duke cancer researcher who falsely claimed to be a Rhodes Scholar and may have faked several analyses of chemotherapy and cancer, has resigned from the university. The Duke Chronicle reports that Potti …stepped down from his position at Duke’s Institute for Genome Sciences and Policy Friday and took responsibility for the … Continue reading Duke’s Anil Potti resigns

“What were you thinking? Do not manipulate those data”

The title of this post is stolen, with adoring attribution, from a piece in the November 16, 2010 issue of Autophagy, because we couldn’t have said it better ourselves. In the piece, the journal’s editor, Dan Klionsky, focuses on images. It reads, in part:

JCO makes it official, retracting paper co-authored by Anil Potti

We have a follow-up to our post two weeks ago about a possible retraction in the case of Anil Potti, the Duke cancer researcher who falsely claimed to be a Rhodes Scholar and may have also faked an analysis of how breast cancer responds to chemotherapy. In that post, we noted that the Raleigh News … Continue reading JCO makes it official, retracting paper co-authored by Anil Potti

So how many retractions are there every year, anyway?

The title of this post is a question that we’ve been asking ourselves since we started Retraction Watch in August, and that others have asked us since. And we’ve gotten different answers depending where we look: In our first post, we cited a study that found 328 retractions in Medline in the decade from 1995 … Continue reading So how many retractions are there every year, anyway?

Science plays two — a retraction, and concern issued about genetics papers

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