The Citation of Retracted COVID-19 Papers is Common and Rarely Critical

Author:

Meyerowitz-Katz GideonORCID,Sekhar Praba,Besançon LonniORCID,Turner TariORCID,McDonald SteveORCID

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundRetraction is the final safeguard against research error/misconduct. In principle, retraction exists to prevent serious issues identified in published research through post-publication review. Our study investigated the citing of clinical research papers retracted during the COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsWe used the Retraction Watch database extracted as of 27/01/2022 to identify retracted COVID-19 papers and the Google Scholar citation function to gather a dataset of citations of retracted clinical research. We reviewed key aspects of the citing research.ResultsIn total, the Retraction Watch database included 212 entries for retracted COVID-19 papers. Of these, 53 papers were clinical. There were a total of 1,141 citations of retracted papers, with 105 errors, leaving 1,036 citations to analyze. The majority (86%) of citations were not critical. The majority (80%) of papers citing retracted research were published after the retraction date.ConclusionsThe citation of retracted and withdrawn COVID-19 clinical studies is common, and rarely critical. Most researchers who cite retracted research do not identify that the paper is retracted, even when submitting long after the paper has been withdrawn. This has serious implications for the reliability of published research and the academic literature, which need to be addressed.

Publisher

Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory

Reference24 articles.

1. Gaming the Metrics: Misconduct and Manipulation in Academic Research. Biagioli M , Lippman A , editors: The MIT Press; 2020.

2. Retraction Note: Low prices and high regret: how pricing influences regret at all-you-can-eat buffets;BMC Nutrition,2017

3. Multichannel presence, boon or curse?: A comparison in price, loyalty, regret, and disappointment;Journal of Business Research,2021

4. ‘The notices are utterly unhelpful’: A look at how journals have handled allegations about hundreds of papers: Retraction Watch; 2021 [Available from: https://retractionwatch.com/2021/05/20/the-notices-are-utterly-unhelpful-a-look-at-how-journals-have-handled-allegations-about-hundreds-of-papers/.

5. Haake S. ‘This is frankly insulting’: An author plagiarized by a journal editor speaks. Retraction Watch. 2021.

Cited by 6 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3