Retracted articles in rehabilitation: just the tip of the iceberg? A bibliometric analysis.

Marco Bordino, Elisa Ravizzotti, Stefano Vercelli
Author Information
  1. Marco Bordino: Private Practice, Vercelli, Italy. marco.bordino16041991@gmail.com. ORCID
  2. Elisa Ravizzotti: Department of Neurorehabilitation Sciences, Istituto Auxologico Italiano, IRCCS, Milan, Italy.
  3. Stefano Vercelli: Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine Unit, Istituti Clinici Scientifici Maugeri, Institute of Veruno, IRCCS, Gattico-Veruno (NO), Italy.

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND AIM: The volume of withdrawn publications in scholarly disciplines has grown steadily, but there is little awareness about this issue in rehabilitation. The aim of this study was to analyze the extent of retracted articles pertaining to rehabilitation.
METHODS: Retracted articles were searched in 4 different bibliographic databases from their inception to April 2020: PubMed, Web of Science, WikiLetters and Retraction Watch. Three independent reviewers assessed the relevance of the retrieved articles to the rehabilitation area.
RESULTS: Of 280 rehabilitation-related publications retracted between 1984 and 2020, 83 (29.6%) were published in 55 full open access journals and 197 (70.4%) were published in 147 traditional, non-open access or hybrid journals. In the last 10 years (2009-2018) there was a significant steady increase in both the total number of retractions (p < 0.005; r = 0.856; R = 0.733) and retraction rate per year (p < 0.05; r = 0.751; R = 0.564). However, the number of retractions represents a very small percentage (~ 0.1%) of the overall volume of publications in rehabilitation.
CONCLUSIONS: Our data indicate that the number of retracted articles in rehabilitation is increasing, although the phenomenon is still limited. However, the true prevalence of misconduct may go unnoticed due to the large number of low-quality journals not indexed in the searched databases. Physiotherapists should be aware of the danger of misleading information originating from withdrawn publications.

Keywords

References

  1. J Med Ethics. 2011 Sep;37(9):567-70 [PMID: 21486985]
  2. Clin Drug Investig. 2018 May;38(5):479 [PMID: 29705920]
  3. Account Res. 2011 Jan;18(1):45-54 [PMID: 21287414]
  4. Croat Med J. 2009 Dec;50(6):532-5 [PMID: 20017220]
  5. EMBO Rep. 2007 May;8(5):422-3 [PMID: 17471252]
  6. J Med Ethics. 2011 Aug;37(8):498-503 [PMID: 21343631]
  7. BMJ. 2003 Oct 18;327(7420):883-4 [PMID: 14563721]
  8. Sci Eng Ethics. 2011 Jun;17(2):213-6 [PMID: 20512425]
  9. J Med Ethics. 2011 Nov;37(11):688-92 [PMID: 21586404]
  10. Curr Med Res Opin. 2011 Jun;27(6):1175-82 [PMID: 21473670]
  11. Sci Eng Ethics. 2010 Jun;16(2):251-61 [PMID: 19597966]
  12. Nature. 2007 May 17;447(7142):236-7 [PMID: 17507938]
  13. Nucleic Acids Res. 2009 Jan;37(Database issue):D921-4 [PMID: 18757888]
  14. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2018 Nov 1;102(3):660-665 [PMID: 29964101]
  15. Jpn J Radiol. 2009 Jan;27(1):2-3 [PMID: 19373525]
  16. EMBO Rep. 2008 Jan;9(1):2 [PMID: 18174889]
  17. Curr Med Res Opin. 2010 Apr;26(4):843-7 [PMID: 20136577]
  18. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2018 Nov;48(11):830-832 [PMID: 30381025]
  19. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2017 May 3;99(9):e44 [PMID: 28463926]
  20. J Med Libr Assoc. 2015 Jul;103(3):136-9 [PMID: 26213505]
  21. JAMA Intern Med. 2018 Jun 1;178(6):863-864 [PMID: 29582044]
  22. Am J Surg. 2018 Nov;216(5):851-855 [PMID: 29229380]
  23. JAMA. 1998 Jul 15;280(3):296-7 [PMID: 9676689]
  24. J Med Ethics. 2011 Feb;37(2):113-7 [PMID: 21081306]
  25. BMJ. 2005 Jul 30;331(7511):245-6 [PMID: 16051990]
  26. PLoS One. 2012;7(10):e44118 [PMID: 23115617]
  27. Future Oncol. 2019 Nov;15(31):3597-3608 [PMID: 31659916]
  28. Int J Nurs Stud. 2018 May;81:8-13 [PMID: 29425913]
  29. Arch Physiother. 2018 Jan 02;8:1 [PMID: 29340208]
  30. Pharmacotherapy. 2012 Jul;32(7):586-95 [PMID: 22581659]
  31. Nature. 2008 Jan 24;451(7177):397-9 [PMID: 18216832]
  32. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2020 Nov;101(11):1980-1990 [PMID: 32402503]
  33. Med J Aust. 2006 Aug 7;185(3):152-4 [PMID: 16893357]
  34. Bull Med Libr Assoc. 1999 Oct;87(4):437-43 [PMID: 10550028]
  35. J Clin Epidemiol. 2009 Oct;62(10):e1-34 [PMID: 19631507]
  36. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2012 Oct 16;109(42):17028-33 [PMID: 23027971]
  37. Lancet. 2011 Apr 23;377(9775):1403 [PMID: 21515150]
  38. Nature. 2008 Jun 19;453(7198):980-2 [PMID: 18563131]
  39. J Med Libr Assoc. 2004 Apr;92(2):242-50 [PMID: 15098054]
  40. Nature. 2011 Oct 05;478(7367):26-8 [PMID: 21979026]
  41. J Med Ethics. 2011 Apr;37(4):249-53 [PMID: 21186208]
  42. J Tradit Complement Med. 2014 Jul;4(3):136-9 [PMID: 25161916]
  43. Science. 2009 Mar 6;323(5919):1280-1 [PMID: 19264995]
  44. BMJ. 2005 Jul 30;331(7511):281-8 [PMID: 16052022]
  45. BJOG. 2019 Aug;126(9):1134-1140 [PMID: 30903641]
  46. PLoS One. 2009 May 29;4(5):e5738 [PMID: 19478950]

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0rehabilitationarticlespublicationsnumberretractedRetractedjournalsvolumewithdrawnsearcheddatabasespublishedaccessretractionsr = 0R = 0HowevermisconductBACKGROUNDANDAIM:scholarlydisciplinesgrownsteadilylittleawarenessissueaimstudyanalyzeextentpertainingMETHODS:4differentbibliographicinceptionApril2020:PubMedWebScienceWikiLettersRetractionWatchThreeindependentreviewersassessedrelevanceretrievedareaRESULTS:280rehabilitation-related1984202083296%55fullopen197704%147traditionalnon-openhybridlast10years2009-2018significantsteadyincreasetotalp < 0005856733retractionrateperyearp < 005751564representssmallpercentage~ 01%overallCONCLUSIONS:dataindicateincreasingalthoughphenomenonstilllimitedtrueprevalencemaygounnoticedduelargelow-qualityindexedPhysiotherapistsawaredangermisleadinginformationoriginatingrehabilitation:justtipiceberg?bibliometricanalysisPhysiotherapyRehabilitationResearchpublication

Similar Articles

Cited By