Search Results for: nature

Another ‘Majorana’ particle paper retracted, this time from Science

Nearly a year after marking a paper on the elusive “Majorana” particle with an expression of concern, and almost three years after publishing a critique of its reproducibility, Science has retracted the article due to “serious irregularities and discrepancies” in the data.  A few papers about Majorana particles, which would be useful in quantum computing … Continue reading Another ‘Majorana’ particle paper retracted, this time from Science

Weekend reads: A whistleblower finds possible misconduct — again; embracing failure; radical transparency for journals

Would you consider a donation to support Weekend Reads, and our daily work? Thanks in advance. The week at Retraction Watch featured: Our list of retracted or withdrawn COVID-19 papers is up to 268. There are more than 36,000 retractions in our database — which powers retraction alerts in EndNote, LibKey, Papers, and Zotero. And have you seen our leaderboard of authors with the most … Continue reading Weekend reads: A whistleblower finds possible misconduct — again; embracing failure; radical transparency for journals

Weekend reads, double edition: Science’s ‘nasty Photoshopping problem’; Dr. Oz’s publication ban; image manipulation detection software

Would you consider a donation to support Weekend Reads, and our daily work? Thanks in advance. This week, it’s a special double edition of Weekend Reads, thanks to a site outage that meant we couldn’t post last Saturday. The last two weeks at Retraction Watch featured: Our list of retracted or withdrawn COVID-19 papers is up to 267. … Continue reading Weekend reads, double edition: Science’s ‘nasty Photoshopping problem’; Dr. Oz’s publication ban; image manipulation detection software

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?

When editors confuse direct criticism with being impolite, science loses

In January 2022, motivated by our experience with eClinicalMedicine, we wrote about mishandling of published errors by journal editors. We had noticed that the methods used for the analysis of a cluster randomized trial published in the journal were invalid. Using a valid approach, we reanalyzed the raw data, which were shared with us by the … Continue reading When editors confuse direct criticism with being impolite, science loses

Weekend reads: A journal ends accept/reject in peer review; more of a Nobelist’s work comes under scrutiny; CNRS director says what he thinks of sleuths

Would you consider a donation to support Weekend Reads, and our daily work? Thanks in advance. The week at Retraction Watch featured: Paper co-authored by Australian journalist Maryanne Demasi to be marked with expression of concern Catch and kill: What it’s like to try to get a NEJM paper corrected Paper co-authored by sleuth Elisabeth Bik marked … Continue reading Weekend reads: A journal ends accept/reject in peer review; more of a Nobelist’s work comes under scrutiny; CNRS director says what he thinks of sleuths

Elsevier journal retracts nearly 50 papers because they were each accepted on the “positive advice of one illegitimate reviewer report”

An Elsevier journal has retracted 47 papers that an accomplished sleuth says appear to have been generated by a paper mill.  The articles, by researchers from countries including China, Kazakhstan and Russia appeared in Thinking Skills and Creativity. Here’s a sample notice, for a paper titled “Steal like an artist: Connection between critical thinking and … Continue reading Elsevier journal retracts nearly 50 papers because they were each accepted on the “positive advice of one illegitimate reviewer report”

Weekend reads: A bizarre turn in a plagiarism case; lessons of the ‘replication crisis’; special issues redux

Would you consider a donation to support Weekend Reads, and our daily work? Thanks in advance. The week at Retraction Watch featured: In 1987, the NIH found a paper contained fake data. It was just retracted. ‘A big pain’: Professor up to six retractions for plagiarism and manipulated peer review ‘A display of extreme academic integrity’: A … Continue reading Weekend reads: A bizarre turn in a plagiarism case; lessons of the ‘replication crisis’; special issues redux

In 1987, the NIH found a paper contained fake data. It was just retracted.

Ronald Reagan was president and James Wyngaarden was director of the National Institutes of Health when a division of the agency found 10 papers describing trials of psychiatric drugs it had funded had fake data or other serious issues.  Thirty-five years later, one of those articles has finally been retracted.  A 1987 report by the … Continue reading In 1987, the NIH found a paper contained fake data. It was just retracted.

‘A display of extreme academic integrity’: A grad student who found a key error praises the original author

Last week, we wrote about the story of Paul Lodder, a graduate student at the University of Amsterdam who had been trying without success to replicate the findings of a 2020 paper in Scientific Reports by Rubén Herzog, of the Universidad de Valparaíso in Chile. The paper would end up retracted. At the time, Lodder had not … Continue reading ‘A display of extreme academic integrity’: A grad student who found a key error praises the original author