Update: Potti’s South Carolina medical license now listed as active

Updated at 1:40 p.m. Eastern: When original posted, this item reported, correctly, that the South Carolina Board of Medical Examiners’ website listed Anil Potti’s license as “suspended.” However, that status has now been changed to “active,” along with “No disciplinary action taken by the Board. This certifies that the above licensee is in good standing.” We are working to figure out why the status was changed.

Update, 1:55 p.m.: The Board tells us they made a mistake:

I looked into this matter and apparently this was a clerical error on our part because there are no public orders at this time. You should see this reflected on our licensee lookup system within 24 hours. Sorry for any confusion.

Anil Potti, the former Duke oncology researcher who lost his job at a South Carolina oncology practice earlier this week, has had his South Carolina medical license suspended, SCNow reports.

The South Carolina Board of Medical Examiners now lists Potti’s license — which he was granted on April 6, 2011 — as “suspended.” “active.”

We had a look at his other licenses. Continue reading Update: Potti’s South Carolina medical license now listed as active

Climate science critic Wegman reprimanded by one university committee while another finds no misconduct

The author of a controversial and now-retracted paper questioning the science of climate change has been reprimanded by his university for plagiarism. According to USA Today’s Dan Vergano, who broke the news:

[Edward] Wegman was the senior author of a 2006 report to Congress that criticized climate scientists as excessively collaborative, and found fault with a statistical technique used in two climate studies. Portions of the report analysis were published in the journal, Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, in a 2008 study.

University of Massachusetts professor Raymond Bradley filed a complaint against Wegman in 2010, noting that portions of the report and the CSDA study appeared lifted from one of his textbooks and from other sources, including Wikipedia. CSDA later retracted the study, noting the plagiarism, last year.

Here’s the explicit retraction notice: Continue reading Climate science critic Wegman reprimanded by one university committee while another finds no misconduct

Inquiry at Maimonides triggers two retractions in Chest, and retraining for the researchers

The journal Chest has retracted two publications — a paper and an earlier meeting abstract — from a group of researchers at Maimonides Medical Center in New York City after learning that the investigators mischaracterized the nature of their study. In addition to losing the two publications, the authors were ordered to undergo a refresher in proper research methods.

Here’s the notice for the abstract, which has been cited once, according to Thomson Scientific’s Web of Knowledge: Continue reading Inquiry at Maimonides triggers two retractions in Chest, and retraining for the researchers

How to avoid retractions for plagiarism: Advice from a radiology journal editor (and arXiv)

Earlier this month, we highlighted the concerns of the editors of the ACS Nano journal about self-plagiarism, otherwise known as duplication. The editor of the American Journal of Roentgenology (AJR) — that’s radiology, for the uninitiated — has similar concerns, but about plagiarism of others’ work.

In an editorial published in the journal’s January issue, Thomas Berquist notes:

Preliminary data including all article types accepted by AJR show that the amount of duplication varies significantly with different article types. For example, duplication in Original Research articles may be up to 58% and in Memorials, 23%. That is not to say that all duplications are significant or deliberate. For example, most computer software packages pick up words that are the same in a given sentence, pulse sequences that vary with vendors, and other similarities that may be appropriately referenced or quoted.

The ORI, Berquist notes, “has reported that up to 25% of their misconduct allegations involve plagiarism.” So how can authors avoid it? Continue reading How to avoid retractions for plagiarism: Advice from a radiology journal editor (and arXiv)

Updated: Anil Potti out at Coastal Cancer Center; practice blames Duke for glowing recommendations

Anil Potti, the former Duke oncologist who has now retracted ten papers, is no longer listed as a staff member at the oncology practice that hired him sometime last year.

The development, first reported by Duke Check, follows a 60 Minutes segment last week focused on Potti and Duke. Duke Check also noted that a Myrtle Beach PR firm had promised a statement later today. Continue reading Updated: Anil Potti out at Coastal Cancer Center; practice blames Duke for glowing recommendations

Dental X-rays linked to Alzheimer’s disease? Abstract saying so temporarily withdrawn

Alzheimer’s & Dementia has “temporarily withdrawn” a 2012 abstract, slated for publication next month, linking Alzheimer’s disease with exposure to dental x-rays.

The author is Caroline Rodgers, a self-described “independent writer/researcher who investigates public health issues and advocates for change.” Although we can’t find the text, we’re guessing that its premise is similar to that of her 2011 paper in Medical Hypotheses, titled “Dental X-ray exposure and Alzheimer’s disease: a hypothetical etiological association.”

Here’s the abstract from that paper: Continue reading Dental X-rays linked to Alzheimer’s disease? Abstract saying so temporarily withdrawn

Tenth Potti retraction appears, in Clinical Cancer Research

Anil Potti and his colleagues have retracted another paper, “Characterizing the Clinical Relevance of an Embryonic Stem Cell Phenotype in Lung Adenocarcinoma,” originally published in the December 15, 2009, issue of Clinical Cancer Research.

According to the notice: Continue reading Tenth Potti retraction appears, in Clinical Cancer Research

“Failure probability” turns out to be quite high as engineers double-submit paper, then see it retracted

A couple of engineers in Iran turn out to be better at predicting the “failure probability” of water pipes than of their chances of being published.

Consider this retraction notice for “Estimation of failure probability in water pipes network using statistical model,” originally published in February 2011 in Engineering Failure Analysis: Continue reading “Failure probability” turns out to be quite high as engineers double-submit paper, then see it retracted

Flawed model leads to retraction of polymer paper

The International Journal of Impact Engineering has a highly technical retraction of an article whose authors discovered that crucial findings relied on a model that was different from the one they reported using in a particular figure.

The article, “Dynamic behavior of polymers at high strain-rates based on split Hopkinson pressure bar tests,” was published online last November by a pair of researchers from the U.K. and China. As the notice states:

Continue reading Flawed model leads to retraction of polymer paper

We’re mostly wrong, but trust us: Our column on mega-corrections for Lab Times

courtesy Nature

Have you seen this correction, from the September 8, 2011 issue of Nature, for “Tumour vascularization via endothelial differentiation of glioblastoma stem-like cells?”

The figures and Supplementary figures of this Letter are affected by errors and improper editing. The correct figures are now provided, with an explanation of the variations. The original Letter has not been corrected online. We apologise for the confusion that our errors could have produced. We admit our negligence in the supervision of technical activity. We acknowledge that image manipulation is not acceptable and that any image modification must be clearly described. None of the alterations have any direct impact on the validity of our conclusions, which were also substantially confirmed in papers published by other independent groups1, 2. Continue reading We’re mostly wrong, but trust us: Our column on mega-corrections for Lab Times