Post retraction citations in context: a case study.

Judit Bar-Ilan, Gali Halevi
Author Information
  1. Judit Bar-Ilan: Department of Information Science, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat Gan, Israel.
  2. Gali Halevi: Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY USA.

Abstract

This study examines the nature of citations to articles that were retracted in 2014. Out of 987 retracted articles found in ScienceDirect, an Elsevier full text database, we selected all articles that received more than 10 citations between January 2015 and March 2016. Since the retraction year was known for only about 83% of the retracted articles, we chose to concentrate on recent citations, that for certain appeared after the cited paper was retracted. Overall, we analyzed 238 citing documents and identified the context of each citation as positive, negative or neutral. Our results show that the vast majority of citations to retracted articles are positive despite of the clear retraction notice on the publisher's platform and regardless of the reason for retraction. Positive citations can be also seen to articles that were retracted due to ethical misconduct, data fabrication and false reports. In light of these results, we listed some recommendations for publishers that could potentially minimize the referral to retracted studies as valid.

Keywords

References

  1. JAMA. 1990 Mar 9;263(10):1420-3 [PMID: 2406475]
  2. J Med Ethics. 2011 Sep;37(9):567-70 [PMID: 21486985]
  3. PLoS One. 2013 Jul 08;8(7):e68397 [PMID: 23861902]
  4. EMBO Rep. 2008 Jan;9(1):2 [PMID: 18174889]
  5. PLoS Med. 2013 Dec;10(12):e1001563 [PMID: 24311988]
  6. Annu Rev Psychol. 2016;67:693-711 [PMID: 26273897]
  7. JAMA. 1990 Mar 9;263(10):1424-6 [PMID: 2406476]
  8. J Nutr. 2003 Mar;133 Suppl 3:933S-940S [PMID: 12612179]
  9. Sci Eng Ethics. 2015 Feb;21(1):127-37 [PMID: 24668038]
  10. J Med Ethics. 2008 Nov;34(11):807-9 [PMID: 18974415]
  11. Nature. 2000 Nov 16;408(6810):288 [PMID: 11099018]
  12. J Korean Med Sci. 2015 Nov;30(11):1713 [PMID: 26539021]
  13. J Am Soc Inf Sci. 1992 Aug;43(7):488-93 [PMID: 11653988]
  14. Biosci Trends. 2015 Apr;9(2):134-7 [PMID: 25902952]
  15. Sci Eng Ethics. 2010 Jun;16(2):251-61 [PMID: 19597966]
  16. Sci Eng Ethics. 2016 Aug;22(4):1063-1072 [PMID: 26150092]
  17. Evid Based Nurs. 2016 Apr;19(2):54 [PMID: 26468090]
  18. Bull Med Libr Assoc. 1999 Oct;87(4):437-43 [PMID: 10550028]
  19. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2012 Oct 16;109(42):17028-33 [PMID: 23027971]
  20. J Med Ethics. 2011 Apr;37(4):249-53 [PMID: 21186208]
  21. Rev Med Suisse. 2013 Nov 27;9(408):2260-1 [PMID: 24383256]
  22. Science. 2006 Apr 7;312(5770):40-1 [PMID: 16601165]
  23. Mol Nutr Food Res. 2014 Jun;58(6):1212-25 [PMID: 24585438]
  24. Obes Rev. 2010 Jan;11(1):64-6 [PMID: 20653849]
  25. J Microbiol Biol Educ. 2014 Dec 15;15(2):151-4 [PMID: 25574267]
  26. J Med Ethics. 2011 Nov;37(11):688-92 [PMID: 21586404]

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0citationsarticlesretractedretractionstudycitationpositiveresultsPositivePostexaminesnature2014987foundScienceDirectElsevierfulltextdatabaseselectedreceived10January2015March2016Sinceyearknown83%choseconcentraterecentcertainappearedcitedpaperOverallanalyzed238citingdocumentsidentifiedcontextnegativeneutralshowvastmajoritydespiteclearnoticepublisher'splatformregardlessreasoncanalsoseendueethicalmisconductdatafabricationfalsereportslightlistedrecommendationspublisherspotentiallyminimizereferralstudiesvalidcontext:caseNegativeNeutralRetracted

Similar Articles

Cited By (25)