Literature DB >> 17703606

Correction and use of biomedical literature affected by scientific misconduct.

Anne Victoria Neale1, Justin Northrup, Rhonda Dailey, Ellen Marks, Judith Abrams.   

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to identify and describe published research articles that were named in official findings of scientific misconduct and to investigate compliance with the administrative actions contained in these reports for corrections and retractions, as represented in PubMed. Between 1993 and 2001, 102 articles were named in either the NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts ("Findings of Scientific Misconduct") or the U.S. Office of Research Integrity annual reports as needing retraction or correction. In 2002, 98 of the 102 articles were indexed in PubMed. Eighty-five of these 98 articles had indexed corrections: 47 were retracted; 26 had an erratum; 12 had a correction described in the "comment" field. Thirteen had no correction, but 10 were linked to the NIH Guide "Findings of Scientific Misconduct", leaving only 3 articles with no indication of any sort of problem. As of May 2005, there were 5,393 citations to the 102 articles, with a median of 26 citations per article (range 0-592). Researchers should be alert to "Comments" linked to the NIH Guide as these are open access, and the "Findings of Scientific Misconduct' reports are often more informative than the statements about the retraction or correction found in the journals.

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17703606      PMCID: PMC2796981          DOI: 10.1007/s11948-006-0003-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Sci Eng Ethics        ISSN: 1353-3452            Impact factor:   3.525


  21 in total

1.  Scientific misconduct and correcting the scientific literature.

Authors:  D M Parrish
Journal:  Acad Med       Date:  1999-03       Impact factor: 6.893

2.  ORI findings of scientific misconduct in clinical trials and publicly funded research, 1992-2002.

Authors:  Sandra M Reynolds
Journal:  Clin Trials       Date:  2004       Impact factor: 2.486

3.  Scientific misconduct. Cleaning up the paper trail.

Authors:  Jennifer Couzin; Katherine Unger
Journal:  Science       Date:  2006-04-07       Impact factor: 47.728

4.  Scientific misconduct. Even retracted papers endure.

Authors:  Katherine Unger; Jennifer Couzin
Journal:  Science       Date:  2006-04-07       Impact factor: 47.728

5.  Federal health officials continue to reorganize offices for investigating scientific misconduct.

Authors:  C Marwick
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1992-08-19       Impact factor: 56.272

6.  The aftermath of scientific fraud.

Authors:  Laura Bonetta
Journal:  Cell       Date:  2006-03-10       Impact factor: 41.582

7.  Research misconduct, retraction, and cleansing the medical literature: lessons from the Poehlman case.

Authors:  Harold C Sox; Drummond Rennie
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2006-03-06       Impact factor: 25.391

8.  The continued use of retracted, invalid scientific literature.

Authors:  M P Pfeifer; G L Snodgrass
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1990-03-09       Impact factor: 56.272

9.  Authors slow to retract 'fraudulent' papers.

Authors:  Q Schiermeier
Journal:  Nature       Date:  1998-06-04       Impact factor: 49.962

10.  Phenomena of retraction: reasons for retraction and citations to the publications.

Authors:  J M Budd; M Sievert; T R Schultz
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1998-07-15       Impact factor: 56.272

View more
  11 in total

1.  Postpublication errors in imaging-related journals.

Authors:  M Castillo; M Northam; K E Halm
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2012-03-29       Impact factor: 3.825

2.  Reporting of article retractions in bibliographic databases and online journals.

Authors:  Kath Wright; Catriona McDaid
Journal:  J Med Libr Assoc       Date:  2011-04

3.  Opinion: Medical misinformation in the era of Google: Computational approaches to a pervasive problem.

Authors:  Scott R Granter; David J Papke
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2018-06-19       Impact factor: 11.205

4.  Manuscript Referencing Errors and Their Impact on Shaping Current Evidence.

Authors:  Anastasia Rivkin
Journal:  Am J Pharm Educ       Date:  2020-07       Impact factor: 2.047

5.  Lack of Improvement in Scientific Integrity: An Analysis of WoS Retractions by Chinese Researchers (1997-2016).

Authors:  Lei Lei; Ying Zhang
Journal:  Sci Eng Ethics       Date:  2017-09-09       Impact factor: 3.525

6.  Analysis of citations to biomedical articles affected by scientific misconduct.

Authors:  Anne Victoria Neale; Rhonda K Dailey; Judith Abrams
Journal:  Sci Eng Ethics       Date:  2009-07-14       Impact factor: 3.525

7.  Improving Trend of Adhering to Ethical Measures in Iranian Research in Human Genetics: A Survey from 2005 to 2009; and the Road Ahead.

Authors:  Seyed Hasan Saadat; Khodabakhsh Ahmadi; Fakhruddin Feyzi; Mostafa Ghanei
Journal:  Iran J Public Health       Date:  2013-10       Impact factor: 1.429

8.  A proposal for considering research integrity from the perspective of behavioral economics.

Authors:  Melissa S Anderson; Jamal A Adam
Journal:  J Microbiol Biol Educ       Date:  2014-12-15

Review 9.  The visibility of scientific misconduct: A review of the literature on retracted journal articles.

Authors:  Felicitas Hesselmann; Verena Graf; Marion Schmidt; Martin Reinhart
Journal:  Curr Sociol       Date:  2016-10-13

10.  Plagiarism in scientific publishing.

Authors:  Izet Masic
Journal:  Acta Inform Med       Date:  2012-12
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.