The authors of a 2014 paper in the Journal of the American College of Surgeons about incisional hernia have lost their article for being a duplicate submission. The paper, “Impact on Quality of Life of Using an Onlay Mesh to Prevent Incisional Hernia in Midline Laparotomy: A Randomized Clinical Trial,” came from a group at … Continue reading First cut is the deepest: paper on incisional hernia sliced for duplication
With the increasingly hectic pace of modern life, everybody is always on the look out for time-saving tricks and tips. Scientists at the National University of Singapore and the Hong Kong Polytechnic University certainly found one, but we really can’t recommend it: doing one randomized controlled trial (RCT) with several outcomes, and publishing them as three separate … Continue reading Heart study bleeds into three papers, one retracted and one withdrawn
A major scandal in Japan over the Novartis hypertension drug valsartan has resulted in a retraction from the Journal of Human Hypertension. Frequent Retraction Watch subject Hiroaki Matsubara resigned his post at Kyoto Prefectural University in 2013, after his work on valsartan was shown to be riddled with data errors and undisclosed conflicts of interest. Also that year, … Continue reading Can’t spell Novartis without VART: Drug study retracted for conflict of interest, data issues
The number of papers retracted for fake peer reviews — well in excess of 100, by our count — continues to grow. The latest to join the list are “Rebamipide plus proton pump inhibitor versus proton pump inhibitor alone in treatment of endoscopic submucosal dissection-induced gastric ulcer: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials” and “Association … Continue reading Fake peer review fells two more papers
Several months after a drug company cancelled development of a potential diabetes cure because it found evidence that a biotech they had recently acquired had committed misconduct in studies of the drug, two retractions of relevant studies have appeared. The research involves DiaPep277, which, as Josh Levy explained here in September, “would cause the immune system … Continue reading Retractions follow revelations of misconduct by diabetes biotech
Take us at our word when we tell you this isn’t some exercise in meta-irony or meta-criticism or any other meta-bullshit, but a pair of researchers at Drexel University in Philadelphia have published a paper calling for an end to irony in science. First, some background: In 2001, an Israeli researcher named Leonard Leibovici wrote … Continue reading Does irony have a place in science?
The Journal of Clinical Psychopharmacology has retracted a 2011 paper on depersonalization disorder by a pair of authors in Azerbaijan who got a bit too familiar with their source material without proper attribution. And the journal has offered its readers a handy — if depressingly obvious — admonition about publication ethics. The article, “Lamotrigine in … Continue reading Psych paper falls afoul of journal’s plagiarism policy (hint: don’t plagiarize)
The Journal of International Oral Health has retracted a 2014 paper on dental pain by a group from India. Although the ostensible reason was plagiarism, we wonder if the offending authors might gone a bit further. The article, “Sniffing out pain: An in vivo intranasal study of analgesic efficacy,” purported to be a study of … Continue reading Plagiarism charge bites authors of oral pain paper
Two authors of a 2012 paper sponsored by a company that made grand claims about green coffee bean extract’s abilities to help people lose weight have retracted it. The study was cited by The Dr. Oz Show, and last month it cost the company a $3.5 million settlement with the Feds. Here’s the notice for … Continue reading Authors retract green coffee bean diet paper touted by Dr. Oz
A paper in SpringerPlus on treating asthma with antioxidants was retracted on September 25 for something of a trifecta of ethical problems. The retraction notice indicates that the patients never consented, there was no ethical review, and the university supposedly overseeing the study had no knowledge of it: