Search Results for: sting

A shadow was cast on a bone researcher’s work. What are journals doing about his papers?

Last year, a researcher cast doubt on a bone scientist’s clinical trials, suggesting some of the findings may not be legitimate. So what’s happened since? Since 2015, journals have retracted 14 papers by bone researcher Yoshihiro Sato, based at Mitate Hospital in Japan, for issues ranging from self-plagiarism, to problems with data, to including co-authors without their consent. … Continue reading A shadow was cast on a bone researcher’s work. What are journals doing about his papers?

“Existence and motive to retaliate:” Judge hands victory to whistleblower scientist

A Michigan researcher whose accusations of misconduct against his former employers led to years of legal battles has won a judge’s ruling that could earn him one of his jobs back. Over the past few years, Christian Kreipke has been embroiled in legal battles with the Detroit VA Medical Center and Wayne State University, where … Continue reading “Existence and motive to retaliate:” Judge hands victory to whistleblower scientist

Weekend reads: A “culture of fear?”; blogs vs. academic papers; neurosurgery retractions on the rise

The week at Retraction Watch featured a new record for most retractions by a single journal, and an impassioned plea from a biostatistician for journals to clean up their act. Here’s what was happening elsewhere: 

Dear journals: Clean up your act. Regards, Concerned Biostatistician

Recently, a biostatistician sent an open letter to editors of 10 major science journals, urging them to pay more attention to common statistical problems with papers. Specifically, Romain-Daniel Gosselin, Founder and CEO of Biotelligences, which trains researchers in biostatistics, counted how many of 10 recent papers in each of the 10 journals contained two common … Continue reading Dear journals: Clean up your act. Regards, Concerned Biostatistician

“Ethical ambiguity:” When scientific misconduct isn’t black and white

Some types of misconduct are obvious – most researchers would agree cooking data and plagiarizing someone’s work are clear no-nos. But what about overhyping your findings? Using funding allocated to an unrelated project, if it keeps a promising young student afloat? On these so-called “gray” areas of research behavior, people aren’t so clear what to … Continue reading “Ethical ambiguity:” When scientific misconduct isn’t black and white

“Think of the unthinkable:” JAMA retraction prompts author to urge others to share data

A few months ago, a researcher told Evelien Oostdijk there might be a problem with a 2014 JAMA study she had co-authored. The study had compared two methods of preventing infection in the intensive care unit (ICU). But a separate analysis had produced different results. Oostdijk, from the University Medical Center Utrecht in The Netherlands, immediately … Continue reading “Think of the unthinkable:” JAMA retraction prompts author to urge others to share data

Need to find a replication partner, or collaborator? There’s an online platform for that

Do researchers need a new “Craigslist?” We were recently alerted to a new online platform called StudySwap by one of its creators, who said it was partially inspired by one of our posts. The platform creates an “online marketplace” that previous researchers have called for, connecting scientists with willing partners – such as a team looking for someone … Continue reading Need to find a replication partner, or collaborator? There’s an online platform for that

Journal flags paper about GMO foods over concerns about figures

A journal has flagged a paper by a researcher who has questioned the safety of genetically modified organisms, after receiving concerns that there were issues with some images. In the 2006 paper, researchers led by Federico Infascelli, an animal nutrition researcher at the University of Naples, tested the blood of rabbits fed genetically modified soybeans. Starting in November … Continue reading Journal flags paper about GMO foods over concerns about figures

Weekend reads: Death of a cancer lab; women economists’ papers are more readable; self-correction grows

The week at Retraction Watch featured a study of why researchers commit misconduct, and the story of former Northwestern scientist who sued the university for defamation. Here’s what was happening elsewhere:

As third retraction for prominent physicist appears, university still won’t acknowledge investigation

Despite a university’s attempts to avoid discussing a misconduct investigation involving one of its former (and prominent) researchers, we keep reading more about it. In the third retraction this year for physicist Dmitri Lapotko, the journal mentions a misconduct investigation at Rice University, which concluded the data had been falsified. Trouble is, whenever we’ve tried to talk … Continue reading As third retraction for prominent physicist appears, university still won’t acknowledge investigation