Citing retracted literature: a word of caution

Abstract

IntroductionInappropriate citation of retracted literature is a common problem in the general medical literature. In 2020, more than 2300 articles were retracted, a dramatic increase from 38 in 2000. By exploring a contemporary series of retractions by one research group, we aimed to evaluate if citations of retracted articles is occurring in the area of regional anesthesiology.MethodsUsing the Scopus database, we examined the full text of all the articles citing research articles coauthored by an anesthesiologist who had multiple articles retracted in 2022. After excluding the research articles citing non-retracted articles authored by the above mentioned anesthesiologist, we included in our analysis all the articles containing a retracted citation and published after the retraction notice.ResultsThe search was performed on October 30, 2022, retrieving a total of 121 articles citing the researcher’s work. Among the retrieved articles, 53 correctly cited non-retracted research and 37 were published before the retraction notice. Among the 31 remaining articles, 42 retracted research papers were cited. Twenty-five of the retracted articles were cited in the Discussion section of the manuscripts, 15 in the Introduction section, 1 in the Methods section (description of a technique), and one was cited in a review. No manuscript used the flawed data to calculate the sample size.DiscussionIn this contemporary example from the regional anesthesia literature, we identified that citation of retracted work remains a common phenomenon.

Reply to Dr Sethuraman

“…We would like to express our gratitude to Dr Sethuraman for his interest1 in our research,2 and we believe that he raised some important issues that warrant further discussion.…”

“…One crucial aspect of this responsibility is to check the retraction status of references. As most citations of retracted articles occur in the Introduction and Discussion sections of articles,2 authors and reviewers should carefully examine the references cited in these sections to ensure that none of them have been retracted. However, the responsibility does not solely lie with authors and reviewers; in fact, both the editors and the publishers also have a vital role in ensuring that the references are appropriately verified for retraction status.…”

Citation of retracted articles: simple solutions to this perennial problem

“…I read with great interest the recently published article on citation of retracted articles of our specialty 1. I wish to present my reflections and provide some simple solutions to this persistent menace.…”

“…De Cassai et al 1 state that ‘several publishers do not transmit retraction notices in a correct or timely fashion to PubMed’ and cited the study by Bakker et al (reference #13 in De Cassai et al 1) to that statement. However, Bakker and Riegelman2 state that the inconsistencies in notifying the retractions happened with another database (not PubMed) and the repositories of libraries.…”

“…De Cassai et al 1 observed that out of the 42 citations of retracted articles of Ueshima, the majority happened in the Discussion and Introduction sections (25,15 respectively), and one in a review. I believe that all these citations were totally unwarranted and could have been definitely avoided if the concerned authors of those articles had taken proper precautions.…”