Recent Trends: Retractions of Articles in the Oncology Field

Overview

Journal Heliyon

Specialty Social Sciences

Date 2024 Jul 10

PMID 38984306

Authors

Quan Qi

Jiaqun Huang

Yinhang Wu

Yuefen Pan

Jing Zhuang

Xi Yang

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: In recent years, there has been a surge in media reports on articles being retracted after publication. This issue has gained significant attention, particularly due to the consecutive large-scale retractions carried out by renowned international publishers, which have aroused widespread concern in the society.

Objective: To analyze the data of retracted articles and retraction trends.

Methods: The publications were searched through Web of Science Core Collection (WoSCC) database and imported into CiteSpace in plain text format, and visual analysis of countries, institutions, keywords, and subject areas were performed to reveal the trends of retracted articles and the worst areas of retraction.

Results: From 1990 to 2022, 21,568 retracted articles were retrieved, among which the number of retracted articles increased year by year. China is the country with the highest number of retracted articles; Islamic Azad University is the institution with the highest number of retracted articles. In the analysis of all retracted articles across different subject areas, the number of retracted articles in the field of oncology was the highest; In the keyword cluster analysis of retracted articles within the field of oncology, the most prominent category of retracted articles were related to pancreatic cancer.

Conclusions: Scientific and systematic analysis of retracted articles is conducive to improving the quality of papers, raising the level of human research, and cleaning up the research environment.

References

Didier E, Guaspare-Cartron C . The new watchdogs' vision of science: A roundtable with Ivan Oransky ( Retraction Watch) and Brandon Stell ( PubPeer). Soc Stud Sci. 2018; 48(1):165-167. DOI: 10.1177/0306312718756202. View

Kocyigit B, Akyol A . Analysis of Retracted Publications in The Biomedical Literature from Turkey. J Korean Med Sci. 2022; 37(18):e142. PMC: 9091427. DOI: 10.3346/jkms.2022.37.e142. View

Pantziarka P, Meheus L . Journal retractions in oncology: a bibliometric study. Future Oncol. 2019; 15(31):3597-3608. DOI: 10.2217/fon-2019-0233. View

Yang W, Sun N, Song H . Analysis of the retraction papers in oncology field from Chinese scholars from 2013 to 2022. J Cancer Res Ther. 2024; 20(2):592-598. DOI: 10.4103/jcrt.jcrt_1627_23. View

Horbach S, Bouter L, Gaskell G, Hiney M, Kavouras P, Mejlgaard N . Designing and implementing a research integrity promotion plan: Recommendations for research funders. PLoS Biol. 2022; 20(8):e3001773. PMC: 9432753. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pbio.3001773. View

Wang B, Lai J, Yan X, Jin F, Yao C . Exploring the characteristics, global distribution and reasons for retraction of published articles involving human research participants: A literature survey. Eur J Intern Med. 2020; 78:145-146. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejim.2020.03.016. View

Lei L, Zhang Y . Lack of Improvement in Scientific Integrity: An Analysis of WoS Retractions by Chinese Researchers (1997-2016). Sci Eng Ethics. 2017; 24(5):1409-1420. DOI: 10.1007/s11948-017-9962-7. View

Fang F, Steen R, Casadevall A . Misconduct accounts for the majority of retracted scientific publications. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2012; 109(42):17028-33. PMC: 3479492. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1212247109. View

Conroy G . How ChatGPT and other AI tools could disrupt scientific publishing. Nature. 2023; 622(7982):234-236. DOI: 10.1038/d41586-023-03144-w. View

10.

Conroy G . Scientific sleuths spot dishonest ChatGPT use in papers. Nature. 2023; . DOI: 10.1038/d41586-023-02477-w. View

11.

Bozzo A, Bali K, Evaniew N, Ghert M . Retractions in cancer research: a systematic survey. Res Integr Peer Rev. 2018; 2:5. PMC: 5803635. DOI: 10.1186/s41073-017-0031-1. View

12.

Cokol M, Ozbay F, Rodriguez-Esteban R . Retraction rates are on the rise. EMBO Rep. 2008; 9(1):2. PMC: 2246630. DOI: 10.1038/sj.embor.7401143. View

13.

Wu H, Luan Y . Retraction: Achieving near-Pt hydrogen production on defect nanocarbon the synergy between carbon defects and heteroatoms. Chem Commun (Camb). 2023; 59(71):10676. DOI: 10.1039/d3cc90275g. View

14.

Van Noorden R . More than 10,000 research papers were retracted in 2023 - a new record. Nature. 2023; 624(7992):479-481. DOI: 10.1038/d41586-023-03974-8. View

15.

Amos K . The ethics of scholarly publishing: exploring differences in plagiarism and duplicate publication across nations. J Med Libr Assoc. 2014; 102(2):87-91. PMC: 3988779. DOI: 10.3163/1536-5050.102.2.005. View

16.

Rahimi F, Talebi Bezmin Abadi A . Passive Contribution of ChatGPT to Scientific Papers. Ann Biomed Eng. 2023; 51(11):2340-2350. DOI: 10.1007/s10439-023-03260-8. View

17.

Kaidi A, Jackson S . Retraction Note: KAT5 tyrosine phosphorylation couples chromatin sensing to ATM signalling. Nature. 2019; 568(7753):576. PMC: 6554193. DOI: 10.1038/s41586-019-1142-2. View

18.

Wager E, Barbour V, Yentis S, Kleinert S . Retractions: guidance from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Croat Med J. 2009; 50(6):532-5. PMC: 2802086. DOI: 10.3325/cmj.2009.50.532. View

19.

Laar A, Redman B, Ferguson K, Caplan A . Institutional Approaches to Research Integrity in Ghana. Sci Eng Ethics. 2020; 26(6):3037-3052. PMC: 10286241. DOI: 10.1007/s11948-020-00257-7. View

20.

Kaidi A, Weinert B, Choudhary C, Jackson S . RETRACTED: Human SIRT6 promotes DNA end resection through CtIP deacetylation. Science. 2010; 329(5997):1348-53. PMC: 3276839. DOI: 10.1126/science.1192049. View