Go to Home

Search

-Advanced Search   -Search Guidelines

J Korean Med Sci.  2023 Oct;38(41):e333. 10.3346/jkms.2023.38.e333.

Causes for Retraction in the Biomedical Literature: A Systematic Review of Studies of Retraction Notices

Affiliations
  • 1Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
  • 2Center for Digital Health, Medical Science Research Institute, Kyung Hee University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
  • 3Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Suwon, Korea
  • 4Samsung Advanced Institute for Health Sciences & Technology (SAIHST), Sungkyunkwan University, Samsung Medical Center, Seoul, Korea
  • 5Centre for Health Performance and Wellbeing, Anglia Ruskin University Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
  • 6Research and Development Unit, Parc Sanitari Sant Joan de Déu, CIBERSAM, Barcelona, Spain
  • 7ICREA, Barcelona, Spain
  • 8Department of Psychiatry, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada
  • 9Department of Mental Health, The Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, ON, Canada
  • 10Ottawa Hospital Research Institute (OHRI), Clinical Epidemiology Program, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada
  • 11School of Epidemiology and Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada
  • 12Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Charité Universitätsmedizin, Berlin, Germany
  • 13IMPACT - The Institute for Mental and Physical Health and Clinical Translation, School of Medicine, Barwon Health, Deakin University, Geelong, VIC, Australia
  • 14Department of Health, Social and Clinical Pharmacy, College of Pharmacy, Chung-Ang University, Seoul, Korea
  • 15The Graduate School of Pharmaceutical Industry Management, Chung-Ang University, Seoul, Korea
  • 16Department of Pediatrics, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
  • 17The Center for Medical Education Training and Professional Development, Yonsei Donggok Medical Education Institute, Seoul, Korea
  • 18Severance Underwood Meta-Research Center, Institute of Convergence Science, Yonsei University, Seoul, Korea
  • 19Meta-Research Innovation Center at Stanford (METRICS) and Departments of Medicine, Epidemiology and Population Health, Biomedical Data Science, and Statistics, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA

Abstract

Background
Many studies have evaluated the prevalence of different reasons for retraction in samples of retraction notices. We aimed to perform a systematic review of such empirical studies of retraction causes.
Methods
The PubMed/MEDLINE database and the Embase database were searched in June 2023. Eligible studies were those containing sufficient data on the reasons for retraction across samples of examined retracted notices.
Results
A 11,181 potentially eligible items were identified, and 43 studies of retractions were included in this systematic review. Studies limited to retraction notices of a specific subspecialty or country, journal/publication type are emerging since 2015. We noticed that the reasons for retraction are becoming more specific and more diverse. In a meta-analysis of 17 studies focused on different subspecialties, misconduct was responsible for 60% (95% confidence interval [CI], 53–67%) of all retractions while error and publication issues contributed to 17% (95% CI, 12–22%) and 9% (95% CI, 6–13%), respectively. The end year of the retraction period in all included studies and the proportion of misconduct presented a weak positive association (coefficient = 1.3% per year, P = 0.002).
Conclusion
Misconduct seems to be the most frequently recorded reason for retraction across empirical analyses of retraction notices, but other reasons are not negligible. Greater specificity of causes and standardization is needed in retraction notices.

Keyword

Retraction; Retraction of Publication; Withdrawal; Misconduct

Figure

  • Fig. 1 Bubble plot of all forty-three studies on retracted publications included for review.

  • Fig. 2 Forest plots of reason for retraction in studies categorized by subspecialties. (A) Forest plot of the proportion of misconduct for retraction in studies categorized by subspecialties. (B) Forest plot of the proportion of error for retraction in studies categorized by subspecialties. (C) Forest plot of the proportion of publication issues for retraction in studies categorized by subspecialties.

  • Fig. 3 Meta-regression plot of the proportion of misconduct for retraction in studies categorized by subspecialties (left) and all included studies (right).


Reference

1. Cokol M, Ozbay F, Rodriguez-Esteban R. Retraction rates are on the rise. EMBO Rep. 2008; 9(1):2.
2. Vuong QH, La VP, Hồ MT, Vuong TT, Ho MT. Characteristics of retracted articles based on retraction data from online sources through February 2019. Sci Ed. 2020; 7(1):34–44.
3. Fang FC, Steen RG, Casadevall A. Misconduct accounts for the majority of retracted scientific publications. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2012; 109(42):17028–17033. PMID: 23027971.
4. Fanelli D, Ioannidis JP, Goodman S. Improving the integrity of published science: an expanded taxonomy of retractions and corrections. Eur J Clin Invest. 2018; 48(4):e12898.
5. Yeo-Teh NSL, Tang BL. An alarming retraction rate for scientific publications on coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Account Res. 2021; 28(1):47–53. PMID: 32573274.
6. Cha Y, Jung W, Seo M, Rahmati M. The emerging pandemic recent: SARS-CoV-2. Life Cycle. 2023; 3:e2.
7. Kleinert S. Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). COPE’s retraction guidelines. Lancet. 2009; 374(9705):1876–1877. PMID: 19962558.
8. Barbour V, Bloom T, Lin J, Moylan E.. Amending published articles: time to rethink retractions and corrections? F1000Res. 2017; 6(1960):1960.
9. Fanelli D. Set up a ‘self-retraction’ system for honest errors. Nature. 2016; 531(7595):415. PMID: 27008933.
10. Reynolds SM. ORI findings of scientific misconduct in clinical trials and publicly funded research, 1992–2002. Clin Trials. 2004; 1(6):509–516. PMID: 16279291.
11. The retraction watch database. Updated 2022. Accessed March 26, 2022. http://retractiondatabase.org/ .
12. Partial retractions: NLM policy change. Updated 2016. Accessed August 23, 2022. https://www.nlm.nih.gov/pubs/techbull/so16/so16_partial_retractions_pol_change.html .
13. Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. Syst Rev. 2021; 10(1):89. PMID: 33781348.
14. Lee SW, Koo MJ. PRISMA 2020 statement and guidelines for systematic review and meta-analysis articles, and their underlying mathematics: Life Cycle Committee Recommendations. Life Cycle. 2022; 2:e9.
15. Gaudino M, Robinson NB, Audisio K, Rahouma M, Benedetto U, Kurlansky P, et al. Trends and characteristics of retracted articles in the biomedical literature, 1971 to 2020. JAMA Intern Med. 2021; 181(8):1118–1121. PMID: 33970185.
16. Rapani A, Lombardi T, Berton F, Del Lupo V, Di Lenarda R, Stacchi C. Retracted publications and their citation in dental literature: a systematic review. Clin Exp Dent Res. 2020; 6(4):383–390. PMID: 32233020.
17. Miller JJ. The inverse of the Freeman–Tukey double arcsine transformation. Am Stat. 1978; 32(4):138.
18. Higgins JP, Thompson SG. Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis. Stat Med. 2002; 21(11):1539–1558. PMID: 12111919.
19. Egger M, Davey Smith G, Schneider M, Minder C. Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. BMJ. 1997; 315(7109):629–634. PMID: 9310563.
20. Schwarzer G. Meta: an R package for meta-analysis. R News. 2007; 7(3):40–45.
21. Viechtbauer W. Conducting meta-analyses in R with the metafor package. J Stat Softw. 2010; 36(3):1–48.
22. R Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing;2013.
23. Xu SB, Hu G. A cross-disciplinary and severity-based study of author-related reasons for retraction. Account Res. 2022; 29(8):512–536. PMID: 34228942.
24. Balhara YP, Mishra A. A study exploring attributes and nature of the retracted literature on mental disorders. Indian J Med Ethics. 2015; 12(1):30–37. PMID: 25376921.
25. Bolboacă SD, Buhai DV, Aluaş M, Bulboacă AE. Post retraction citations among manuscripts reporting a radiology-imaging diagnostic method. PLoS One. 2019; 14(6):e0217918. PMID: 31194762.
26. Budd JM, Sievert M, Schultz TR. Phenomena of retraction: reasons for retraction and citations to the publications. JAMA. 1998; 280(3):296–297. PMID: 9676689.
27. Campos-Varela I, Ruano-Raviña A. Misconduct as the main cause for retraction. A descriptive study of retracted publications and their authors. Gac Sanit. 2019; 33(4):356–360. PMID: 29776690.
28. Chambers LM, Michener CM, Falcone T. Plagiarism and data falsification are the most common reasons for retracted publications in obstetrics and gynaecology. BJOG. 2019; 126(9):1134–1140. PMID: 30903641.
29. Chauvin A, De Villelongue C, Pateron D, Yordanov Y. A systematic review of retracted publications in emergency medicine. Eur J Emerg Med. 2019; 26(1):19–23. PMID: 28825929.
30. Dal-Ré R. Analysis of retracted articles on medicines administered to humans. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2019; 85(9):2179–2181. PMID: 31236989.
31. Dal-Ré R, Ayuso C. Reasons for and time to retraction of genetics articles published between 1970 and 2018. J Med Genet. 2019; 56(11):734–740. PMID: 31300549.
32. Damineni RS, Sardiwal KK, Waghle SR, Dakshyani MB. A comprehensive comparative analysis of articles retracted in 2012 and 2013 from the scholarly literature. J Int Soc Prev Community Dent. 2015; 5(1):19–23. PMID: 25767762.
33. Decullier E, Huot L, Samson G, Maisonneuve H. Visibility of retractions: a cross-sectional one-year study. BMC Res Notes. 2013; 6(1):238. PMID: 23782596.
34. Deculllier E, Maisonneuve H. Correcting the literature: improvement trends seen in contents of retraction notices. BMC Res Notes. 2018; 11(1):490. PMID: 30016985.
35. Dutta Majumder P, Raman R, Krishnan T, George R. Analysis of retracted articles in the ophthalmic literature. Eye (Lond). 2021; 35(12):3384–3388. PMID: 33594243.
36. Elango B. Retracted articles in the biomedical literature from Indian authors. Scientometrics. 2021; 126(5):3965–3981. PMID: 33716353.
37. Elango B. Characteristics of retracted editorial articles in the biomedical literature. Scientometrics. 2022; 127(3):1431–1438. PMID: 35001989.
38. Grieneisen ML, Zhang M. A comprehensive survey of retracted articles from the scholarly literature. PLoS One. 2012; 7(10):e44118. PMID: 23115617.
39. Hwang K, Wu X. Retracted or withdrawn publications in journals relating to plastic surgery. J Craniofac Surg. 2018; 29(5):1114–1116. PMID: 29481502.
40. King EG, Oransky I, Sachs TE, Farber A, Flynn DB, Abritis A, et al. Analysis of retracted articles in the surgical literature. Am J Surg. 2018; 216(5):851–855. PMID: 29229380.
41. Li G, Kamel M, Jin Y, Xu MK, Mbuagbaw L, Samaan Z, et al. Exploring the characteristics, global distribution and reasons for retraction of published articles involving human research participants: a literature survey. J Multidiscip Healthc. 2018; 11:39–47. PMID: 29403283.
42. Madlock-Brown CR, Eichmann D. The (lack of) impact of retraction on citation networks. Sci Eng Ethics. 2015; 21(1):127–137. PMID: 24668038.
43. Mansourzadeh MJ, Ghazimirsaeid J, Motamedi N, Najafi A, Abdullahi Abubakar A, Dehdarirad H. A Survey of Iranian retracted publications indexed in PubMed. Iran J Public Health. 2021; 50(1):188–194. PMID: 34178778.
44. Moylan EC, Kowalczuk MK. Why articles are retracted: a retrospective cross-sectional study of retraction notices at BioMed Central. BMJ Open. 2016; 6(11):e012047.
45. Nair S, Yean C, Yoo J, Leff J, Delphin E, Adams DC. Reasons for article retraction in anesthesiology: a comprehensive analysis. Can J Anaesth. 2020; 67(1):57–63. PMID: 31617069.
46. Palla IA, Singson M, Thiyagarajan S. A comparative analysis of retracted papers in health sciences from China and India. Account Res. 2020; 27(7):401–416. PMID: 32279538.
47. Panahi S, Soleimanpour S. The landscape of the characteristics, citations, scientific, technological, and altmetrics impacts of retracted papers in hematology. Account Res. 2023; 30(7):363–378. PMID: 34612782.
48. Rai R, Sabharwal S. Retracted publications in orthopaedics: prevalence, characteristics, and trends. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2017; 99(9):e44. PMID: 28463926.
49. Redman BK, Yarandi HN, Merz JF. Empirical developments in retraction. J Med Ethics. 2008; 34(11):807–809. PMID: 18974415.
50. Rosenkrantz AB. Retracted publications within radiology journals. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2016; 206(2):231–235. PMID: 26797347.
51. Rossouw TM, Matsau L, van Zyl C. An analysis of retracted articles with authors or co-authors from the African region: possible implications for training and awareness raising. J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2020; 15(5):478–493. PMID: 32917117.
52. Shi Q, Wang Z, Zhou Q, Hou R, Gao X, He S, et al. More consideration is needed for retracted non-Cochrane systematic reviews in medicine: a systematic review. J Clin Epidemiol. 2021; 139:57–67. PMID: 34186193.
53. Shimray SR. Research done wrong: a comprehensive investigation of retracted publications in COVID-19. Account Res. 2023; 30(7):393–406. PMID: 34856823.
54. Singh HP, Mahendra A, Yadav B, Singh H, Arora N, Arora M. A comprehensive analysis of articles retracted between 2004 and 2013 from biomedical literature - a call for reforms. J Tradit Complement Med. 2014; 4(3):136–139. PMID: 25161916.
55. Wang J, Ku JC, Alotaibi NM, Rutka JT. Retraction of neurosurgical publications: a systematic review. World Neurosurg. 2017; 103:809–814.e1. PMID: 28412480.
56. Wang T, Xing QR, Wang H, Chen W. Retracted publications in the biomedical literature from open access journals. Sci Eng Ethics. 2019; 25(3):855–868. PMID: 29516389.
57. Wasiak J, Hamilton DG, Foroudi F, Faggion CM Jr. Surveying retracted studies and notices within the field of radiation oncology. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2018; 102(3):660–665. PMID: 29964101.
58. Woolley KL, Lew RA, Stretton S, Ely JA, Bramich NJ, Keys JR, et al. Lack of involvement of medical writers and the pharmaceutical industry in publications retracted for misconduct: a systematic, controlled, retrospective study. Curr Med Res Opin. 2011; 27(6):1175–1182. PMID: 21473670.
59. Huh S, Kim SY, Cho HM. Characteristics of retractions from Korean medical journals in the KoreaMed database: a bibliometric analysis. PLoS One. 2016; 11(10):e0163588. PMID: 27706245.
60. Kardeş S, Levack W, Özkuk K, Atmaca Aydın E, Seringeç Karabulut S. Retractions in rehabilitation and sport sciences journals: a systematic review. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2020; 101(11):1980–1990. PMID: 32402503.
61. Stavale R, Ferreira GI, Galvão JAM, Zicker F, Novaes MR, Oliveira CM, et al. Research misconduct in health and life sciences research: a systematic review of retracted literature from Brazilian institutions. PLoS One. 2019; 14(4):e0214272. PMID: 30986211.
62. Kocyigit BF, Akyol A. Analysis of retracted publications in the biomedical literature from Turkey. J Korean Med Sci. 2022; 37(18):e142. PMID: 35535370.
63. Fanelli D. Why growing retractions are (mostly) a good sign. PLoS Med. 2013; 10(12):e1001563. PMID: 24311988.
64. Steen RG, Casadevall A, Fang FC. Why has the number of scientific retractions increased? PLoS One. 2013; 8(7):e68397. PMID: 23861902.
65. Franzen M, Rödder S, Weingart P. Fraud: causes and culprits as perceived by science and the media. Institutional changes, rather than individual motivations, encourage misconduct. EMBO Rep. 2007; 8(1):3–7. PMID: 17203094.
66. Fanelli D. How many scientists fabricate and falsify research? A systematic review and meta-analysis of survey data. PLoS One. 2009; 4(5):e5738. PMID: 19478950.
67. Bauchner H, Fontanarosa PB, Flanagin A, Thornton J. Scientific misconduct and medical journals. JAMA. 2018; 320(19):1985–1987. PMID: 30347041.
68. Recommendations for the conduct, reporting, editing, and publication of scholarly work in medical journals. Updated 2021. Accessed April 3, 2022. https://www.icmje.org/recommendations/ .
69. Goodstein D. Conduct and misconduct in science. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1995; 775(1):31–38.
70. Stretton S, Bramich NJ, Keys JR, Monk JA, Ely JA, Haley C, et al. Publication misconduct and plagiarism retractions: a systematic, retrospective study. Curr Med Res Opin. 2012; 28(10):1575–1583. PMID: 22978774.
71. Rohwer A, Wager E, Young T. Advancing research integrity: a programme to embed good practice in Africa. Pan Afr Med J. 2019; 33:298. PMID: 31692770.
72. Brainard J. Rethinking retractions. Science. 2018; 362(6413):390–393. PMID: 30361352.
73. Grey A, Avenell A, Bolland M. Timeliness and content of retraction notices for publications by a single research group. Account Res. 2022; 29(6):347–378. PMID: 33882262.
Full Text Links
  • JKMS
Actions
Cited
CITED
export Copy
Close
Share
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
Similar articles

Cited

Download

Close

Save citations to file

Download

Close

Email citations

Send Email
recaptcha 영역

Close

Copyright © 2024 by Korean Association of Medical Journal Editors. All rights reserved.     E-mail: koreamed@kamje.or.kr