Productivity patterns, collaboration and scientific careers of authors with retracted publications in clinical medicine

• Published in: Scientometrics 2022, Vol.127 (4), p.1883-1901
• Main Authors: Zhang, Qin, Fu, Hui-Zhen
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Bibliometrics; Careers; Clinical medicine; Collaboration; Computer Science; Ethical standards; Information Storage and Retrieval; Library Science; Norms; Productivity; Professional misconduct; Scientific papers
• ISSN: 0138-9130; 1588-2861
• DOI: 10.1007/s11192-021-04252-y

Problematic publications and scientific misconduct have raised global concern, in which the authors have played a key role. Since research misconduct occurs more frequently in the clinical medicine field, we took this field as an example to explore productivity patterns, collaboration, and scientific careers of authors at the individual level. The application of Lotka’s law ( C  = 0.883, n  = 3.597) showed a loose collaboration network and a predominant aggregation of authors with multiple retracted publications. Most authors were retracted only once while a small group of authors had most retracted publications. Authors with most retractions appeared to have stable collaboration with certain individuals. The occurrences of falsification and ethical issues increased with the higher involvement of authors with multiple retracted publications. Two typical publication patterns of retractions in different stages of scientific career have been found: (1) committing scientific misconduct in the early career, mainly for promotion, and (2) participating in scientific misconduct when mature in the career, most due to neglecting the duty as a supervisor. The team culture, regulations, publication policies, and joint efforts by the scientific community have a direct influence on the occurrences of scientific misconduct. Conclusions are made with a focus on the need for more actions to prevent scientific misconduct and to strengthen scientific norms and integrity.