August 3rd is a big day around here — it’s our birthday. Today, we celebrate seven years since two science journalists decided, not exactly on whim but close to it, to launch a blog about retractions. Little did they know. (To hear our co-founder Ivan Oransky talk more about this milestone, check out his podcast … Continue reading Happy birthday to Retraction Watch! (We’re 7.) And an update on our database.
The author of a 2016 paper describing a potentially invaluable lab tool has retracted it, following heavy criticism from outside groups that could not reproduce the findings. The paper had already been tagged with an Expression of Concern by the journal, Nature Biotechnology, which included data from multiple groups casting doubt on the original findings. Although … Continue reading “The data have spoken:” Controversial NgAgo gene editing study retracted
The researcher whose brazen theft of a manuscript he had reviewed prompted a “Dear plagiarist” letter from the aggrieved author once the deceit was discovered has lost a second paper for plagiarism. International Scholarly Research Notices, a Hindawi publication, has retracted a 2012 study by Carmine Finelli and colleagues, citing widespread misuse of text from … Continue reading Researcher who stole manuscript during peer review earns second retraction
The week at Retraction Watch featured an update on a Harvard lab whose PI is subject to a restraining order by one of his grad students, and the retraction of a paper that used male-only pronouns. Here’s what was happening elsewhere:
We’ve all heard horror stories of lab disputes that can quickly spin out of control. (Such as a graduate student obtaining a restraining order against his supervisor, which we covered earlier this year for Science.) Naturally, prospective students want to do their homework before committing to a particular laboratory or supervisor. A new website, QCist, … Continue reading Looking to avoid a bad lab? A new site wants to help
Against the authors’ objections, Nature Methods has added an expression of concern to a 2017 paper that drew fire for suggesting a common gene editing technique could cause widespread collateral damage to the genome. The latest note — the second to be added in two months — alerts readers to an alternative interpretation of the … Continue reading Controversial CRISPR paper earns second editorial note
Yes, yes, we know: It’s easy to publish “fake” papers in journals and expose the inherent flaws of academic publishing. We’ve covered many such stings, but there are simply too many for us to cover all. Still, occasionally one is just too clever to ignore. On Saturday, the pseudonymous blogger Neuroskeptic announced that they had … Continue reading May the sting be with you: Another journal prank, too good to overlook
The Annals of Surgery has retracted a paper that used only male pronouns to describe surgeons following outcry from readers. The journal plans to replace the article — a recent presidential address of the European Surgical Association — with a new version with more “gender inclusive language.” The problem, said editor Keith D. Lillemoe, is that … Continue reading Following uproar, surgery journal retracts paper with male-only pronouns
A journal is investigating research by a group in Australia, after receiving “serious allegations” regarding a 2017 paper about treating eye burns. The journal, Frontiers in Pharmacology, has issued an expression of concern (EOC) for the 2017 paper while it investigates. The notice does not specify the nature of the allegations. Meanwhile, several other papers … Continue reading Work by group at Australian university faces scrutiny
The week at Retraction Watch featured authors making a difficult decision to retract once-promising findings about gliobastoma, and sanctions for a researcher in whose lab image manipulations were found. Here’s what was happening elsewhere: