Retraction Watch

Paper that ripped off a PhD thesis is retracted

The authors of a 2021 article on “cognitive radio” have lost the paper after the journal learned that they’d pilfered the work from a doctoral dissertation.

“A Cluster-Based Distributed Cooperative Spectrum Sensing Techniques in Cognitive Radio” was published in the proceedings of the 2020 International Conference on Innovative Data Communication Technologies and Application, which was held in Coimbatore, India. The proceedings was a supplement to Innovative Data Communication Technologies and Application, a Springer Nature title.

Cognitive radio, according to Wikipedia, “can intelligently detect whether any portion of the spectrum is in use, and can temporarily use it without interfering with the transmissions of other users.”

Springer Nature slaps more than 400 papers with expressions of concern all at once

A total of 436 papers in two Springer Nature journals are being subjected to expressions of concern, in the latest case of special issues — in this case, “topical collections” — likely being exploited by rogue editors or impersonators.

The move follows the discovery, as we reported in August, of more than 70 papers in a collection in one of the journals, the Arabian Journal of Geosciences, that referred to subjects — aerobics and running wear, for example — seemingly unrelated to geology. That sleuthing began on PubPeer and was broadened by Alexander Magazinov and Guillaume Cabanac. We have now learned that Springer Nature had already been looking into the issues.

Here’s the notice that appears with a list of more than 400 articles from three different topical collections for the Arabian Journal of Geosciences:

Scale whose copyright owner defends zealously falls under scrutiny — and journal takes two years to publish a critique

As long-time readers of this blog know, we’ve spilled more than a few pixels on the work of Donald Morisky. His Morisky Medication Adherence Scale (MMAS) has been a financial boon to himself — and the bane of many researchers who have been forced to either retract papers or pay Morisky what they consider to be exorbitant fees to retroactively license the instrument.

But lately things have been a bit rocky for Morisky. Last year, he and his former business associate (read, legal enforcer) found themselves embroiled in a lawsuit which claims, as we reported, that Morisky used:

their company as a personal piggy bank and taking steps to starve the business of clients and funnel money to his family.

And now, a researcher has questioned the validity of the MMAS, arguing that his review of a foundational paper underpinning the instrument shows serious flaws.

Researcher leaves Wistar Institute as he retracts a Nature paper

A group of researchers at the Wistar Institute in Philadelphia have retracted a paper in Nature for data discrepancies and inconsistencies — as well as missing data. And one of the corresponding authors has left the institution, Retraction Watch has learned.

The paper, “IspH inhibitors kill Gram-negative bacteria and mobilize immune clearance,” was published in December 2020 and has been cited 7 times, according to Clarivate Analytics’ Web of Science.

Here’s the notice:

Weekend reads: Vaccine-myocarditis preprint withdrawn; are citations worth $100,000 each?; the lesson of ivermectin

Before we present this week’s Weekend Reads, a question: Do you enjoy our weekly roundup? If so, we could really use your help. Would you consider a tax-deductible donation to support Weekend Reads, and our daily work? Thanks in advance.

The week at Retraction Watch featured:

Four papers by Athira CEO earn expressions of concern
Alzheimer’s diagnosis paper retracted for failure to disclose conflicts of interest, other issues
Study comparing hydroxychloroquine and antiviral drug for COVID-19 retracted
“[T]hese shit comments”: Author of a nonsense paper responds on PubPeer
“Fabulous document”, “very helpful guidance”: Sleuths react to recommendations for handling image integrity issues
Authors of a case report on COVID-19 in a prisoner say they ‘are unsatisfied with the quality of [their] work’

Our list of retracted or withdrawn COVID-19 papers is up to 160. And there are now more than 30,000 retractions in our database.

Here’s what was happening elsewhere (some of these items may be paywalled, metered access, or require free registration to read):

Four papers by Athira CEO earn expressions of concern

Leen Kawas, President and CEO of Athira Pharma. (PRNewsfoto/Athira Pharma, Inc.)

A group of researchers at Washington State University has received four expressions of concern for papers whose findings underpin a publicly traded company founded by two of the most senior authors on the articles.

The studies, all of which appeared in the Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics, came from the labs of Joseph Harding, a medical chemist at Washington State, and his colleague Jay Wright. Published between 2011 and 2014, the four articles report on a molecule called angiotensin IV, work which Harding and Wright leveraged to spin-off Athira, a Seattle-based biotech firm developing treatments for conditions including Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s disease.

The CEO of Athira, formerly known as M3 Biotechnology, is Leen Kawas, once a PhD student at Washington State whose 2011 doctoral dissertation provided figures for this fraught 2011 article in JPET, which earned a correction in 2014. Earlier this year, as STAT reported, Kawas was forced to take a leave of absence from the company over concerns that she altered images in several papers. And there has been other scrutiny of the company.

Alzheimer’s diagnosis paper retracted for failure to disclose conflicts of interest, other issues

A surgery journal has retracted a 2021 article by a group of researchers in Brazil for failure to disclose a key conflict of interest and other problems.

“Intracranial pressure waveform changes in Alzheimer’s disease and mild cognitive impairment” — which now seems to have disappeared entirely from the journal’s site — appeared in Surgical Neurology International in July. Led by Estela Barbosa Ribeiro, a nurse at the Federal University of São Carlos, in São Paulo, the article, still available and not marked retracted on PubMed Central, purported to find that measuring intracranial pressure:

Study comparing hydroxychloroquine and antiviral drug for COVID-19 retracted

The authors of a study comparing hydroxychloroquine and the antiviral agent favipiravir as treatments for COVID-19 have lost the paper after post-publication peer review determined that the data did not support the conclusions.

“Safety and efficacy of favipiravir versus hydroxychloroquine in management of COVID-19: A randomised controlled trial” appeared in March in Scientific Reports, a Nature title. The authors, from institutions in Egypt, reported that:

“[T]hese shit comments”: Author of a nonsense paper responds on PubPeer

A conference proceedings for the Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers (IEEE) has retracted a 2021 paper which appears to have been produced in part by the fake article generator SCIGen — an allegation the corresponding author denies.

“Estimate The Efficiency Of Multiprocessor’s Cash Memory Work Algorithms” appeared earlier this year in the 2021 IEEE International Conference on Smart Information Systems and Technologies, where it came to the attention of Guillaume Cabanac and Cyril Labbé.

As readers of this blog might recall, Cabanac, Labbé and their colleague Alexander Magazinov recently wrote a preprint about how mangled translations into English — “tortured phrases,” in their words — can indicate that an article has been churned out by a paper mill.

“Fabulous document”, “very helpful guidance”: Sleuths react to recommendations for handling image integrity issues

Retraction Watch readers are likely familiar with the varied — and often unsatisfying — responses of journals to scientific sleuthing that uncovers potential problems with published images. Some editors take the issues seriously, even hiring staff to respond to allegations and vet manuscripts before publication. Some, however, take years to handle the allegations, or ignore them altogether.

Recently, STM’s Standards and Technology Committee (STEC) appointed a working group to look at these issues At a webinar last week, the group — including members from the American Chemical Society, Elsevier, Springer Nature, Taylor & Francis, Wiley, and other publishers — released a draft of their recommendations, which:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this: