A Retrospective Analysis of the Trend of Retracted Publications in the Field of Biomedical and Life Sciences

Among the many forms of research misconduct, publishing fraudulent data is considered to be serious where the confidence and validity of the research is detrimentally undermined. In this study, the trend of 303 retracted publications from 44 authors (with more than three retracted publications each)...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Science and engineering ethics 2011-09, Vol.17 (3), p.459-468
Main Author: Foo, Jong Yong Abdiel
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Authorship
Bibliometrics
Bioethics
Biological Science Disciplines - ethics
Biological Science Disciplines - trends
Biomedical Engineering and Bioengineering
Biomedical research
Biomedical Research - ethics
Biomedical Research - trends
Databases, Factual
Education
Engineering
Ethics
Ethics, Research
Humans
Life sciences
Medicine/Public Health
Periodicals as Topic - ethics
Periodicals as Topic - trends
Philosophy
Philosophy of Science
Reproducibility of Results
Retraction of Publication as Topic
Retrospective Studies
Scientific Misconduct - trends
Trust
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Among the many forms of research misconduct, publishing fraudulent data is considered to be serious where the confidence and validity of the research is detrimentally undermined. In this study, the trend of 303 retracted publications from 44 authors (with more than three retracted publications each) was analysed. The results showed that only 6.60% of the retracted publications were single-authored and the discovery of fraudulent publications had reduced from 52.24 months (those published before the year 2000) to 33.23 months (those published on the year 2000 and onwards). It appears that with the widely accessible public databases like PubMed, fraudulent publications can be detected more easily. The different approaches adopted by authors who had previous publications retracted are also discussed herein.
ISSN:1353-3452
1471-5546
DOI:10.1007/s11948-010-9212-8