Catching up: Publisher to pull four papers by retraction record holder flagged years ago

Journals published by Wiley are retracting four papers by Yoshitaka Fujii, the anesthesiology researcher with the most retracted scientific papers. Retraction Watch readers will be familiar with Fujii’s case: He currently holds the number one spot on our leaderboard with more than 180 retractions, some of which are pending. (That’s nearly twice the number of … Continue reading Catching up: Publisher to pull four papers by retraction record holder flagged years ago

What should you do if a paper you’ve cited is later retracted?

We all know that researchers continue to cite papers long after they’ve been retracted, posing concerns for the integrity of the literature. But what should you do if one of the papers you’ve cited gets retracted after you’ve already cited it? We posed this question to some members of the board of directors of our … Continue reading What should you do if a paper you’ve cited is later retracted?

Should systematic reviewers report suspected misconduct?

Authors of systematic review articles sometimes overlook misconduct and conflicts of interest present in the research they are analyzing, according to a recent study published in BMJ Open. During the study, researchers reviewed 118 systematic reviews published in 2013 in four high-profile medical journals — Annals of Internal Medicine, the British Medical Journal, The Journal of the American … Continue reading Should systematic reviewers report suspected misconduct?

Ready to geek out on retraction data? Read this new preprint

There’s a new paper about retractions, and it’s chock-full of the kind of data that we love to geek out on. Enjoy. The new paper, “A Multi-dimensional Investigation of the Effects of Publication Retraction on Scholarly Impact,” appears on the preprint server arXiv — meaning it has yet to be peer-reviewed — and is co-authored … Continue reading Ready to geek out on retraction data? Read this new preprint

Weekend reads: Angry meta-analysts; imposter cell lines; when things go wrong

This week at Retraction Watch featured nine more fake peer review retractions, this time from Elsevier, and an update to the retraction count for one-time record holder Joachim Boldt. Here’s what was happening elsewhere:

How long does it take to retract a paper? A look at the Eric Poehlman record

In 2005, the U.S. Office of Research Integrity announced that obesity researcher Eric Poehlman had committed misconduct in 10 published papers. You might think that all of those ten articles would have been retracted a decade later. You’d be wrong. Only six of them have. Here’s what Elizabeth Wager (a member of the board of directors of The … Continue reading How long does it take to retract a paper? A look at the Eric Poehlman record

Weekend reads: Top science excuses; how figures can mislead; a strange disclosure

The week at Retraction Watch featured a primer on research misconduct proceedings, and some developments in the case of Joachim Boldt, who is now second on our leaderboard. Here’s what was happening elsewhere:

Who has the most retractions? Introducing the Retraction Watch leaderboard

Ever since we broke the news about the issues with the now-retracted Science paper about changing people’s minds on gay marriage, we’ve been the subject of a lot of press coverage, which has in turn led a number of people to ask us: Who has the most retractions? Well, we’ve tried to answer that in … Continue reading Who has the most retractions? Introducing the Retraction Watch leaderboard

The Retraction Watch Leaderboard

Who has the most retractions? Here’s our unofficial list (see notes on methodology), which we’ll update as more information comes to light: Yoshitaka Fujii (total retractions: 183) See also: Final report of investigating committee, our reporting, additional coverage Joachim Boldt (160) See also: Editors-in-chief statement, our coverage Yoshihiro Sato (106) See also: our coverage Ali … Continue reading The Retraction Watch Leaderboard

Nature, facing “considerable rise” in retractions, blames lawyers for opaque and delayed notices

Nature, as we and others have noticed, has had what Paul Knoepfler referred to as a “torrent” of retractions in the past two years. That torrent — 13 research papers — has prompted a welcome and soul-searching editorial, as it did in 2010 when the journal had what it called an “unusually large number” of … Continue reading Nature, facing “considerable rise” in retractions, blames lawyers for opaque and delayed notices