Search Results for: sato

How many ducks do you need to line up to get a publication retracted?

In July 2017, we notified the Journal of Bone and Mineral Metabolism (JBMM) of concerns about a randomized controlled trial (RCT) in rats which featured, among other problems, extensive duplication of data in a separate publication, large numbers of discrepancies in the methods and results between the publications, and serious concerns about the governance and … Continue reading How many ducks do you need to line up to get a publication retracted?

Weekend reads: Fake reproductive health data alleged; ‘bad brains;’ ‘heinous’ misconduct

Would you consider a donation to support Weekend Reads, and our daily work? Thanks in advance. The week at Retraction Watch featured: Physics publisher retracting nearly 500 likely paper mill papers Exclusive: NIH researcher resigned amid retractions, including Nature paper Didier Raoult papers earn expressions of concern as criminal investigation gets underway Brain tumor researchers retract paper … Continue reading Weekend reads: Fake reproductive health data alleged; ‘bad brains;’ ‘heinous’ misconduct

An Elsevier journal said it would retract 10 papers two years ago. It still hasn’t.

An Elsevier journal has sat for two years on its decision to retract 10 papers by researchers with known misconduct issues, according to emails seen by Retraction Watch.  The Journal of the Neurological Sciences had decided by June 2020 to retract the articles by Yoshihiro Sato and Jun Iwamoto, who are currently in positions four … Continue reading An Elsevier journal said it would retract 10 papers two years ago. It still hasn’t.

Weekend reads: ‘Published crap;’ randomized grant awards; ‘Problems in Science Publishing’

Would you consider a donation to support Weekend Reads, and our daily work? Thanks in advance. The week at Retraction Watch featured: How to find evidence of paper mills using peer review comments Journal retracts a paper it published with a missing table after author fails to provide it Which takes longer to produce: An infant … Continue reading Weekend reads: ‘Published crap;’ randomized grant awards; ‘Problems in Science Publishing’

PNAS retracts paper that contributed to lung cancer trial

A paper that was the subject of a four-page correction in 2018, and which helped inform a now-halted clinical trial of a drug for lung cancer, has been retracted following an institutional investigation concluded that one of the researchers had falsified the data in that article and at least four others.  And we have learned … Continue reading PNAS retracts paper that contributed to lung cancer trial

Lancet retracts 10-year-old case report

The Lancet has retracted a decade-old case report by a group from Japan after concluding that the authors misrepresented the originality of the work.  The paper was a case report, titled “Hidden Harm,” by a team at Nihon University School of Medicine in Tokyo. The authors described a 46-year-old woman with a history of self-harming … Continue reading Lancet retracts 10-year-old case report

Pulp fiction: Japanese university revokes two dentistry PhDs in case involving two dozen retractions

The misconduct case of an endodontics researcher in Japan who already has lost at least 24 papers for data problems has claimed two more casualties: the PhD theses of a pair of scientists he once helped train. As we reported last year,  Nobuaki Ozeki, who retired from Aichi Gakuin University in 2018, was found to … Continue reading Pulp fiction: Japanese university revokes two dentistry PhDs in case involving two dozen retractions

The peer reviewers and editor wanted to publish my paper. The legal team rejected it.

Move over, Reviewer 2: The legal reviewer wants your job.  Last month, I was relieved when the journal Research Ethics published my article, “The Use of Confidentiality and Anonymity Protections as a Cover for Fraudulent Fieldwork Data.” One unexpected hurdle had almost thwarted publication. The problem wasn’t with the proverbial hard-to-please peer reviewer called Reviewer … Continue reading The peer reviewers and editor wanted to publish my paper. The legal team rejected it.

‘The notices are utterly unhelpful’: A look at how journals have handled allegations about hundreds of papers

Retraction Watch readers may recall the names Jun Iwamoto and Yoshihiro Sato, who now sit in positions 3 and 4 of our leaderboard of retractions, Sato with more than 100. Readers may also recall the names Andrew Grey, Alison Avenell and Mark Bolland, whose sleuthing was responsible for those retractions. In a recent paper in … Continue reading ‘The notices are utterly unhelpful’: A look at how journals have handled allegations about hundreds of papers

“Yep, pretty slow”: Nutrition researchers lose six papers

Six months after we reported that journals had slapped expressions of concern on more than three dozen papers by a group of nutrition researchers in Iran, the retractions have started to trickle in.  But clock started nearly two years ago, after data sleuths presented journals with questions about the findings in roughly 170 papers by … Continue reading “Yep, pretty slow”: Nutrition researchers lose six papers