The week at Retraction Watch featured “a concerning – largely unrecognised – threat to patient safety,” the loss of a grant following findings of misconduct in a controversial study, and a request that authors remove a reference for libel concerns. Here’s what was happening elsewhere:
The week at Retraction Watch featured the world energy solution that wasn’t, a story about Elsevier and fake peer reviews, and a question from a readers about citing retracted papers. Here’s what was happening elsewhere:
One journal broke a retractions record by pulling more than 100 papers in one day for faked reviews, a Harvard graduate student obtained a restraining order against his boss after being forced to undergo a psychiatric exam, and a well-known food scientist at Cornell faced heavy criticism about his research. And that’s just some of … Continue reading The 2017 Retraction Watch Year in Review (hint: Our database is nearly done)
The week at Retraction Watch featured the year’s top 10 retractions, more than two dozen retractions at Elsevier for fake peer review, and the resignations of two editors in chief over a controversial paper. Here’s what was happening elsewhere:
Both editors of a math journal have resigned over the decision to publish a controversial paper, which was apparently made without consulting the editorial board. Last week, the editorial board of EMS Surveys in Mathematical Sciences issued a statement about the paper, saying its acceptance was “a serious mistake.” According to the statement, the two … Continue reading Editors-in-chief of math journal resign over controversial paper
Title: Endotoxaemia during left ventricular assist device insertion: relationship between risk factors and outcome What Caught Our Attention: Robert J. Frumento first caught our notice in 2013, as a coauthor on a paper retracted with a nonspecific reference to author misconduct. Three years later, Frumento was clearly identified as having fabricated data and a master’s … Continue reading Caught Our Notice: Columbia researcher up to five retractions
Title: Umbelliferone reverses depression-like behavior in chronic unpredictable mild stress-induced mice via RIP140/NF-κB pathway What Caught Our Attention: One would think that the corresponding author would have to be aware that they are submitting an article for publication — but apparently not, as this retraction demonstrates. The 2016 paper listed two corresponding authors — along with … Continue reading Caught Our Notice: How can a publication be a surprise to a corresponding author?
After more than 30 years working with scholarly journals, Irene Hames has some thoughts on how to improve peer review. She even wrote a book about it. As the first recipient of the Publons Sentinel Award, Hames spoke to us about the most pressing issues she believes are facing the peer review system — and … Continue reading Make reviews public, says peer review expert
A US government agency has won an initial court ruling against OMICS, which the government says will help stop the academic publisher’s deceptive business practices. Today, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) announced that it won a preliminary injunction in September in its lawsuit against Srinubabu Gedela, CEO of OMICS Group and other companies. The lawsuit, … Continue reading US court issues injunction against OMICS to stop “deceptive practices”
In 1980, Leila Tov-Ruach published a book chapter in which she thanked the editor of the book, Amélie Oksenberg Rorty, “for the hospitality that made the writing of this paper possible.” Normally, such an acknowledgement wouldn’t raise eyebrows. But, the trouble is, Tov-Ruach and Rorty are the same person: Leila Tov-Ruach is a pseudonym for … Continue reading An accomplished philosopher invented a pseudonym. Why?