The Korean Journal of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery has retracted 17 papers, with the common theme of ‘overlap’ — almost always a euphemism for plagiarism, whether self or otherwise. Published between 1993 and 2006, the articles came from a group of authors at the department of otolaryngology at Ajou University School of Medicine in Suwon, … Continue reading Korean ENT journal retracts 17 papers, citing ‘overlap’
2010 was a busy year at Retraction Watch. (Well, actually the first seven months of it weren’t busy at all, since we didn’t launch until August.) We’ve published 88 posts, an average of about four per week. We no longer wonder whether we’ll have enough material to post frequently, as Adam told The New York … Continue reading Top Retraction Watch posts of 2010, and a short wish list for 2011
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
This week’s Nature includes a refreshing and soul-searching editorial about retractions. Excerpt (we added links and corrected a misspelling and wrong country in the editorial after a reader noted the errors below): This year, Nature has published four retractions, an unusually large number. In 2009 we published one. Throughout the past decade, we have averaged … Continue reading Nature comes clean about retractions and why they’re on the rise
A day after an up and coming Harvard stem cell scientist retracted a Nature paper, Blood has issued a notice of concern about another paper by the same group, published in August 2008, the Boston Globe reports. Such notices often, but not always, precede retractions. According to the notice for “Osteolineage niche cells initiate hematopoietic … Continue reading Blood posts “notice of concern” over second Wagers-Mayack paper
“Because of its growing reach and influence, Retraction Watch’s investigations and revelations have helped to address the issue of ‘unhelpful retraction notices’.” In 2020, NewsGuard said we were “unsung heroes,” one of ten sites they pointed to as “models in producing content that is truthful, compelling, credible, and transparent.” “The seamier side of academia, lying, … Continue reading What people are saying about Retraction Watch
Two Dutch researchers were preparing a review of preclinical animal models for hemorrhagic stroke last July when they stumbled across a disturbing pattern in the literature. First, they found many more papers on the topic than the 50 or so they expected based on their experience: more than 600. Also, nearly every study proposed a … Continue reading First-time scientific sleuths prompt nine retractions for neurosurgery group
In 2008, a group of researchers published a paper in Current Biology reporting on what they said was a lungless water-loving frog in Borneo. According to David Bickford, then of the National University of Singapore, and his colleagues, the Bornean flat-headed frog “breathed” the way most salamanders do: by absorbing oxygen through their skin or, … Continue reading ‘No animosity between us’: Lungless frog finding retracted after 16 years
Would you consider a donation to support Weekend Reads, and our daily work? The week at Retraction Watch featured: Our list of retracted or withdrawn COVID-19 papers is up past 400. There are more than 49,000 retractions in The Retraction Watch Database — which is now part of Crossref. The Retraction Watch Hijacked Journal Checker now contains more than 250 titles. And have … Continue reading Weekend reads: ‘The surprising history of abstracts’; is peer review broken?; bee waggle dance data gets the wrong kind of buzz
I was once required to testify in a court case. My lawyer gave me a few pieces of advice, but he repeated one several times, which may be why I remember it. “Never say never,” he said. Or, conversely, never say always. Declarations of absolutes present opposing attorneys too wide an opening. They need to … Continue reading What a database of more than a thousand dismissive literature reviews can tell us