Analysis of Citations to Biomedical Articles Affected by Scientific Misconduct
We describe the ongoing citations to biomedical articles affected by scientific misconduct, and characterize the papers that cite these affected articles. The citations to 102 articles named in official findings of scientific misconduct during the period of 1993 and 2001 were identified through the Institute for Scientific Information Web of Science database. Using a stratified random sampling strategy, we performed a content analysis of 603 of the 5,393 citing papers to identify indications of awareness that the cited articles affected by scientific misconduct had validity issues, and to examine how the citing papers referred to the affected articles. Fewer than 5% of citing papers indicated any awareness that the cited article was retracted or named in a finding of misconduct. We also tested the hypothesis that affected articles would have fewer citations than a comparison sample; this was not supported. Most articles affected by misconduct were published in basic science journals, and we found little cause for concern that such articles may have affected clinical equipoise or clinical care.
KeywordsBibliometric analysis Journalology Journal citations Quantitative content analysis Retraction Scientific misconduct
- Atlas, M. C. (2004). Retraction policies of high-impact biomedical journals. Journal of the Medical Library Association, 92, 242–250.Google Scholar
- Budd, J. M., Sievert, M., Schultz, T. R., & Scoville, C. (1999). Effects of article retraction on citation and practice in medicine. Bulletin of the Medical Library Association, 87, 437–443.Google Scholar
- Caen, J. P., & Han, Z. C. (1993). Control of megakaryocyte development: From basic data to clinical results. Comptes Rendus de l’Academie des Sciences. Série III, Sciences de la vie, 316, 925–930.Google Scholar
- Cokol, M., Iossifov, I., & Rodriguez-Esteban, R. (2007). How many scientific papers should be retracted? European Molecular Biology Organization (EMBO) Reports, 8, 422–423.Google Scholar
- Garfield, E., McVeigh, M., & Muff, M. (2006). Re: Research misconduct, retraction, and cleansing the medical literature: Lessons from the Poehlman case. Annals of Internal Medicine, 145, 472–473.Google Scholar
- Garfield, E., & Welljams-Dorof, A. (1990). The impact of fraudulent research on the scientific literature. The Stephen E. Breuning case. JAMA, 263(10),1424–1426.Google Scholar
- Nath, S. B., Marcus, S. C., & Druss, B. G. (2006). Retractions in the research literature: Misconduct or mistakes? Medical Journal of Australia, 185, 152–154.Google Scholar
- National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc. (2009). NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology™ (v.1.2009, 09/10/08) [website]. http://www.nccn.org. Accessed 1 Jan 2009.
- National Library of Medicine. (2008). Fact sheet. Errata, retractions, partial retractions, corrected and republished articles, duplicate publications, comments (including author replies), updates, patient summaries, and republished (reprinted) articles policy for MEDLINE (updated 10/08/2008) [website]. http://www.nlm.nih.gov/pubs/factsheets/errata.html. Accessed 12 Jan 2009.
- Neale, A. V., Northrup, J., Dailey, R., Marks, E., & Abrams, J. (2007). Correction and use of literature affected by scientific misconduct. Science and Engineering Ethics,13, 5–24.Google Scholar
- Poulton, A. (2007). Mistakes and misconduct in the research literature: Retractions just the tip of the iceberg. Medical Journal of Australia, 186, 323–324.Google Scholar
- Snodgrass, G. L., & Pfeifer, M. P. (1992). The characteristics of medical retraction notices. Bulletin of the Medical Library Association, 80, 328–334.Google Scholar
- Sox, H. C., & Rennie, D. (2006). Research misconduct, retraction, and cleansing the medical literature: Lessons from the Poehlman case. Annals of Internal Medicine, 144, 609–613.Google Scholar
- Thomson Reuters. (2009). Institute for Scientific Information Web of Science [website]. Available at http://isiknowledge.com/WOS. Accessed 14 Jan 2009.
- Tobin, M. J. (2000). Reporting research, retraction of results, and responsibility. American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, 162, 773–774.Google Scholar
- Whitsett, C. F. (1995). The role of hematopoietic growth factors in transfusion medicine. Transfusion Medicine II. Hematology/Oncology Clinics of North America, 9, 23–68.Google Scholar