Probe into Carlo Croce reached “defensible and reasonable” decisions, says external review

An independent analysis of how The Ohio State University reviewed allegations of misconduct against a high-profile cancer researcher has found that the institution “complied with applicable law and with relevant institutional policies and reached reasoned and supportable conclusions.” The review follows numerous allegations of research misconduct against Carlo Croce, described in a March 8 story … Continue reading Probe into Carlo Croce reached “defensible and reasonable” decisions, says external review

It’s official: When journals behave badly, there could be some punishment

Here at Retraction Watch, we constantly receive emails from readers who are frustrated with a particular journal — perhaps it has ignored obvious problems in a published paper, performed only a cursory peer review, or takes months (or years) to take action on a problematic article. Many whistleblowers bring their concerns to the Committee on … Continue reading It’s official: When journals behave badly, there could be some punishment

Weekend reads: Problems in studies of gender; when scholarship is a crime; a journal about Mark Zuckerberg photos

The week at Retraction Watch featured a call to make peer reviews public, lots of news about Cornell food researcher Brian Wansink, and a request by the U.S. NIH that the researchers it funds don’t publish in bad journals. Here’s what was happening elsewhere:

Researcher discovers paper published by co-author in another journal

In February 2016, Albert Jambon received some puzzling news. Several colleagues had alerted him to a paper, published online in late December 2015 in the Journal of African Earth Sciences (JAES), reporting the discovery of a rare mineral, which Jambon had been analyzing. When Jambon read the paper, he realized it was a modified version … Continue reading Researcher discovers paper published by co-author in another journal

Hey, that’s my case study: Another retraction after doctors claim rights to case write-up

A group of researchers have retracted their 2016 case report about a rare dermatologic disorder in the wake of disputes about authorship and institutional approval. The paper describes a young boy with Job’s Syndrome, in which patients experience painful, itchy and frequently disfiguring skin lesions, along with a constellation of other possible symptoms. The condition … Continue reading Hey, that’s my case study: Another retraction after doctors claim rights to case write-up

When a tractor stabs a man in the eye, who gets to write up the case report?

A journal has retracted a paper after the university notified the editors that the authors presented the gruesome details of a patient who they didn’t directly treat. But the paper’s corresponding author disputes that claim, arguing that the first author — a radiologist, who has since passed away, provided a crucial diagnosis in this case. We’ve tried … Continue reading When a tractor stabs a man in the eye, who gets to write up the case report?

Weekend reads: Investigations need sunlight; should we name fraudster names?; how to kill predatory journals

The week at Retraction Watch featured a lawsuit threat following criticism of a popular education program, and the new editor of PLOS ONE’s explanation of why submissions are down. Here’s what was happening elsewhere:

Stuck in limbo: What happens to papers flagged by journals as potentially problematic?

Expressions of concern, as regular Retraction Watch readers will know, are rare but important signals in the scientific record. Neither retractions nor corrections, they alert readers that there may be an issue with a paper, but that the full story is not yet clear. But what ultimately happens to papers flagged by these editorial notices? … Continue reading Stuck in limbo: What happens to papers flagged by journals as potentially problematic?

Plagiarism concerns raised over popular blockchain paper on catching misconduct

A graduate student at McGill University is raising concerns that a popular F1000Research paper may have plagiarized his 2014 blog post that — ironically — proposed a method to prevent scientific misconduct. The student calls the paper “a mirror image” of his work. The February 2016 F1000Research paper, “How blockchain-timestamped protocols could improve the trustworthiness of medical science,” was highlighted … Continue reading Plagiarism concerns raised over popular blockchain paper on catching misconduct

When it takes a village to write a paper, what does it mean to be an author?

We have seen plenty of projects unravel due to disputes over authorship, so we know this is a crucial issue in publishing. And the more authors are involved, the more issues can arise. So what happens when there are hundreds – or even thousands of authors on a single paper? Spencer Klein, a senior scientist … Continue reading When it takes a village to write a paper, what does it mean to be an author?