Hiroaki Matsubara, a former Kyoto Prefectural University cardiology researcher who resigned last year following an investigation, has had another paper retracted, his ninth. Here’s the notice from Arteriosclerosis, Thrombosis, and Vascular Biology:
Last October, the BMJ published a paper by a group of researchers from the United States and Canada questioning the use of statins in patients considered at low risk of cardiovascular disease. The article has been cited eight times since then, according to Thomson Scientific’s Web of Knowledge. It mentioned data from another study that … Continue reading BMJ authors take back inaccurate statin safety statements
Blood has an interesting retraction of a 2011 paper on what a group of authors claimed was a new cell line — but which proved, apparently, to be a chimera. The article, “Oxygen-regulated expression of the erythropoietin gene in the human renal cell line REPC,” came from a team at Universität Duisburg-Essen, in Germany, and … Continue reading Contaminated cells force retraction of Blood paper
Retraction Watch readers: We need help. As many of our loyal tipsters know, the list of retractions and related stories that we can’t get to just keeps getting longer. And as we grow, we want to groom a stable of paid freelance — and perhaps one day full-time — Retraction Watch contributors. So with that … Continue reading Retraction Watch is hiring an intern: Here’s how to apply
A new paper in Intelligence is offering some, well, intel into the peer review process at one prestigious neuroscience journal. The new paper is about another paper, a December 2012 study, “Fractionating Human Intelligence,” published in Neuron by Adam Hampshire and colleagues in December 2012. The Neuron study has been cited 16 times, according to Thomson … Continue reading Anonymous blog comment suggests lack of confidentiality in peer review — and plays role in a new paper
We — and others — have been scratching our heads about the real reasons for the formal retraction on March 21 of a Frontiers in Psychology paper since the journal issued a statement on the subject on Friday that seemed to contradict the retraction notice and that certainly differed from accounts on some blogs. Today, … Continue reading Co-author of retracted conspiracy ideation-climate skepticism paper addresses apparent contradictions
Another busy week at Retraction Watch. Here’s some of what was happening elsewhere on the web:
A year after being clumsily removed from the web following complaints, a controversial paper about “the possible role of conspiracist ideation in the rejection of science” is being retracted. The paper, “Recursive fury: Conspiracist ideation in the blogosphere in response to research on conspiracist ideation,” was authored by Stephan Lewandowsky, John Cook, Klaus Oberauer, and … Continue reading Controversial paper linking conspiracy ideation to climate change skepticism formally retracted
Another busy week at Retraction Watch. Here’s what was happening elsewhere around the web in science publishing and research integrity news:
Another busy week at Retraction Watch, including a ScienceOnline 2014 session Ivan facilitated on post-publication peer review. Here’s a selection of what was happening elsewhere on the web: