Search Results for: potti

Four retractions follow Swedish government findings of negligence, dishonesty

A Swedish ethical review board has censured two biologists and their employer, Uppsala University, for events related to “extensive image manipulations” in five papers published between 2010 and 2014. The case has led to criticism from an outside expert — who brought the allegations to Uppsala — over the current system in Sweden for handling … Continue reading Four retractions follow Swedish government findings of negligence, dishonesty

Weekend reads: The end of journals?; Impact Factor for sale; fake peer reviews earn funding bans

This morning, our thoughts are with the people of Paris. The week at Retraction Watch featured the retraction of a paper claiming dramatically higher rates of sexual trauma among men in the military, and a look at whether gender plays a role in peer review. Also: We’re hiring. Here’s what was happening elsewhere:

Weekend reads: Elsevier mutiny; babies as co-authors; what to do after rejection

This week’s Weekend Reads, which appears below, was preempted yesterday by the news that the Office of Research Integrity had issued a finding of misconduct in the long-running case of Anil Potti. The week also featured news about a child psychiatry trial halted for unexplained reasons, and saw the launch of our new weekly column … Continue reading Weekend reads: Elsevier mutiny; babies as co-authors; what to do after rejection

German dep’t head reprimanded for not catching mistakes of co-author Lichtenthaler

The head of a department at WHU — Otto Beisheim School of Management has been charged with “severe scientific misconduct” for not spotting many of the data irregularities of his co-author Ulrich Lichtenthaler, which have ultimately led to 16 retractions. According to a news release describing a WHU investigation (which we had translated using One Hour Translation), … Continue reading German dep’t head reprimanded for not catching mistakes of co-author Lichtenthaler

Can you spot the signs of retraction? Just count the errors, says a new study

Clinical studies that eventually get retracted are originally published with significantly more errors than non-retracted trials from the same journal, according to a new study in BMJ. The authors actually called the errors “discrepancies” — for example, mathematical mistakes such as incorrect percentages of patients in a subgroup, contradictory results, or statistical errors. The study doesn’t predict … Continue reading Can you spot the signs of retraction? Just count the errors, says a new study

“If you think it’s rude to ask to look at your co-authors’ data, you’re not doing science”: Guest post

Last month, the community was shaken when a major study on gay marriage in Science was retracted following questions on its funding, data, and methodology. The senior author, Donald Green, made it clear he was not privy to many details of the paper — which raised some questions for C. K. Gunsalus, director of the National … Continue reading “If you think it’s rude to ask to look at your co-authors’ data, you’re not doing science”: Guest post

Weekend reads: Sexism from a Nobel laureate; publisher deception; irreproducibility’s price tag

The week at Retraction Watch featured the story behind a Nature retraction, and the retraction of a paper by a pioneer in the field of exosome research. Here’s what was happening elsewhere:

Weekend reads: Gay canvassing study saga continues; Elsevier policy sparks concern; a string of scandals

As might have been expected, continuing developments in the Michael LaCour gay canvassing study retraction have drowned out coverage of stories that ordinarily might capture a lot of attention, such as fake case reports making their way into CDC data. A sampling: Berkeley graduate student David Broockman, one of the people whose critique brought down … Continue reading Weekend reads: Gay canvassing study saga continues; Elsevier policy sparks concern; a string of scandals

Weekend reads: Stress tests in psychology; writing advice to ignore; how to have fun in the lab

This week at Retraction Watch featured a sexist peer review seen around the world, and settlement of the malpractice case against Duke and Anil Potti. Here’s what was happening elsewhere: 

Does peer review ferret out the best science? New study tries to answer

Grant reviewers at the U.S. National Institutes of Health are doing a pretty good job of spotting the best proposals and ranking them appropriately, according to a new study in Science out today. Danielle Li at Harvard and Leila Agha at Boston University found that grant proposals that earn good scores lead to research that … Continue reading Does peer review ferret out the best science? New study tries to answer