Pan Pantziarka1,2, Lydie Meheus1. 1. Anticancer Fund, Brussels, 1853 Strombeek-Bever, Belgium. 2. The George Pantziarka TP53 Trust, London KT1 2JP, UK.
Abstract
Aim: To investigate secular trends in article retractions in the oncology literature, particularly relating to cancer treatments and data available to patients. Methods: A bibliometric analysis of article retractions from PubMed in the period 2000-2018. Results: Analysis shows that article lifetime - that is the time period from initial publication to ultimate retraction - has decreased in recent years. It also shows that the retraction rate has also increased over the same period. Furthermore, over 20% of retracted oncology publications analyzed in this study relate to treatment-relevant topics such as clinical trials and studies in the anticancer properties of supplements. Conclusion: The causes and context of these trends are discussed and reference made to the dangers of scientific misconduct in oncology.
Aim: To investigate secular trends in article retractions in the oncology literature, particularly relating to cancer treatments and data available to patients. Methods: A bibliometric analysis of article retractions from PubMed in the period 2000-2018. Results: Analysis shows that article lifetime - that is the time period from initial publication to ultimate retraction - has decreased in recent years. It also shows that the retraction rate has also increased over the same period. Furthermore, over 20% of retracted oncology publications analyzed in this study relate to treatment-relevant topics such as clinical trials and studies in the anticancer properties of supplements. Conclusion: The causes and context of these trends are discussed and reference made to the dangers of scientific misconduct in oncology.