Governing knowledge in the scientific community: Exploring the role of retractions in biomedicine

@article{Furman2012GoverningKI,
  title={Governing knowledge in the scientific community: Exploring the role of retractions in biomedicine},
  author={Jeffrey L. Furman and Kyle L. Jensen and Fiona E. Murray},
  journal={Research Policy},
  year={2012},
  volume={41},
  pages={276-290}
}
View via Publisher
dspace.mit.edu
52 Citations
Highly Influential Citations
4
Background Citations
14
Methods Citations
1
Results Citations
4

52 Citations

Citation Type

Citation Type

On error in scientific publications and its detection: the case of pharmaceutical clinical trials
TLDR
Analysis of the determinants of error in publications by focusing on clinical research indicates that corrections in the scientific literature depend amongst others on the expected impact of publications, academic peer-control, project size, funding sources and the geographical distance between researchers.
Expert-recommended biomedical journal articles: Their retractions or corrections, and post-retraction citing
TLDR
This study examined a set of 232 recommended, later retracted or corrected articles from Faculty Opinions to identify the characteristics of the expert-recommended articles that were subsequently retracted and investigate what happened after retraction.
Knowledge dissemination in clinical trials: Exploring influences of institutional support and type of innovation on selective reporting
How do academia and society react to erroneous or deceitful claims? The case of retracted articles’ recognition
Researchers give credit to peer-reviewed, and thus, credible publications through citations. Despite a rigorous reviewing process, certain articles undergo retraction due to disclosure of their…
The Unfortunately Long Life of Some Retracted Biomedical Research Publications.
  • J. Hagberg
  • Medicine
    Journal of applied physiology
  • 2020
TLDR
While it initially appears there was a relative "cleansing", as citation rates for these articles did decrease after retraction, the reductions in citation rates were the same as those for matched non-retracted publications both by the same author and by another investigator over the same time frame.
Continued post-retraction citation of a fraudulent clinical trial report, 11 years after it was retracted for falsifying data
TLDR
This paper uses network analysis, citation context analysis, and retraction status visibility analysis to illustrate the potential for extended propagation of misinformation over a citation network, updating and extending a case study of the first 6 years of post-retraction citation.
Collaboration and its influence on retraction based on retracted publications during 1978–2017
TLDR
A negative correlation between the proportion of internationally collaborative publications and the retraction rate was found and the occurrences of plagiarism was found to be lower when a paper is contributed by more authors, while falsification or manipulation, errors or unreliable results appeared more frequently under the same condition.
Retraction: The “Other Face” of Research Collaboration?
TLDR
A unique dataset is utilizes to investigate factors contributing to retraction probability and elapsed time between publication and retraction and finds that publications with authors from elite universities are less likely to be retracted, which is particularly true for retractions due to FFP.
Temporal characteristics of retracted articles
TLDR
The major findings are that both citation counts and Mendeley reader counts continue to grow after retraction, including time of publication, years to retract, growth of post retraction citations over time and social media attention by the three major categories.
The relationship and incidence of three editorial notices in PubPeer: Errata, expressions of concern, and retractions
TLDR
The results show that the relationship between them is scant, the increase in these notices is in proportion to the scientific literature, and the time delay between publication and editorial notice is frequently over 3 years.
...
1
2
3
4
5
...

References

SHOWING 1-10 OF 67 REFERENCES
Retraction policies of high-impact biomedical journals.
  • M. C. Atlas
  • Medicine
    Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA
  • 2004
TLDR
The purpose is to review the issue of retraction in the scientific literature and to examine the policies on retraction of major biomedical journals and including policies in Instructions to Authors relating to the principled conduct of research and publication will improve the ethical environment in which the scientific community works.
Phenomena of retraction: reasons for retraction and citations to the publications.
TLDR
Retracted articles continue to be cited as valid work in the biomedical literature after publication of the retraction; these citations signal potential problems for biomedical science.
Effects of article retraction on citation and practice in medicine.
TLDR
This study examines 235 retracted articles and looks at the reasons for these retractions and citations to the articles subsequent to retraction, including 275 that make explicitly positive mention of retracted articles.
Empirical developments in retraction
TLDR
Current data on key questions about retraction of scientific articles suggest that editors and institutional officials are taking more responsibility for correcting the scientific record but that reasons published in the retraction notice are not always reliable.
Research Misconduct, Retraction, and Cleansing the Medical Literature: Lessons from the Poehlman Case
TLDR
The Poehlman case illustrates the problems associated with carrying out the duties of an editor when someone alleges misconduct, the responsible author's institution refuses to investigate, and no national standard exists.
The characteristics of medical retraction notices.
TLDR
An analysis of medical retraction notices shows that very few are prominent in style, format, or placement, in spite of authoritative publication standards formulated by the International Council of Medical Journal Editors.
The continued use of retracted, invalid scientific literature.
TLDR
There was no evidence that small, obscure journals, non- US journals, or non-US authors were disproportionately responsible for these citations, and although, after retraction, US authors accounted for a smaller percentage of citations, they continued to be the single greatest source.
How many scientific papers should be retracted?
Published scholarly articles commonly contain imperfections: punctuation errors, imprecise wording and occasionally more substantial flaws in scientific methodology, such as mistakes in experimental…
How Many Scientists Fabricate and Falsify Research? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Survey Data
TLDR
Meta-regression showed that self reports surveys, surveys using the words “falsification” or “fabrication”, and mailed surveys yielded lower percentages of misconduct, and when these factors were controlled for, misconduct was reported more frequently by medical/pharmacological researchers than others.
NLM's practices for handling errata and retractions.
TLDR
This paper reports NLM's experience in bringing published retraction and errata notices to the public's attention and relates this experience to the library's overall interest in quality assurance.
...
1
2
3
4
5
...