Inappropriate Citation of Retracted Articles in Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine Publications

Abstract

Background Retracted articles represent research withdrawn from the existing body of literature after publication. Research articles may be retracted for several reasons ranging from honest errors to intentional misconduct. They should not be used as reliable sources, and it is unclear why they are cited occasionally by other articles. This study hypothesized that several mechanisms may contribute to citing retracted literature and aimed to analyze the characteristics of articles citing retracted literature in anesthesiology and critical care. Methods Using the Retraction Watch database, we retrieved retracted articles on anesthesiology and intensive care medicine up to August 16, 2021 and identified the manuscripts citing these retracted articles. A survey designed to investigate the reasons for citing these articles was sent to the corresponding authors of the citing manuscripts. Results We identified 478 retracted articles, 220 (46%) of which were cited at least once. We contacted 1297 corresponding authors of the studies that cited these articles, 417 (32%) of whom responded to our survey and were included in the final analysis. The median number of authors in the analyzed articles was five, and the median elapsed time from retraction to citation was 3 years. Most of the corresponding authors (372, 89%) were unaware of the retracted status of the cited article, mainly because of inadequate notification of the retraction status in journals and/or databases and the use of stored copies. Conclusions The corresponding authors were generally unaware of the retraction of the cited article, usually because of inadequate identification of the retracted status in journals and/or web databases and the use of stored copies. Awareness of this phenomenon and rigorous control of the cited references before submitting a paper are of fundamental importance in research.

Citing retracted literature: a word of caution

“…These models do not consider that prominent sources (such as journals or search engines) can potentially spread the correction to large portions of the population at once. However, missing or unclear labeling of articles as ‘retracted’ on both journals and search engines can also contribute to the citation of the manuscripts 3. In addition, it has been shown that several publishers do not transmit to PubMed the metadata regarding retraction notices in a correct or timely fashion 13…”

“…Data suggest that one out of four researchers does not check references before submission, with almost half failing to adopt a strategy to prevent the citation of retracted literature in their manuscript 3. Moreover, compiling an accurate reference list may be a monotonous and repetitive task increasing the risk of errors due to inattentional blindness.…”

“…A recent article identified almost 500 retracted articles in the anesthesiology field, with reasons for retraction ranging from honest error to deliberate scientific misconduct. Almost half of the retracted research had been inappropriately cited over the years, most of the citing authors were unaware of the retractions 3…”

“…Our analysis of the retracted literature3 was planned and performed before the discovery of multiple episodes of scientific malpractice by a single researcher. After an investigation completed on May 14, 2021, Ueshima, a Japanese researcher, was found to have fabricating data and other research related misconduct in 142 of his articles.…”

How to Stop the Unknowing Citation of Retracted Papers

“…And just as citing overturned precedents can lead to bad legal outcomes, citing retracted papers can lead to a deeply flawed base of evidence for clinical decision-making. In this issue, a study by De Cassai et al 1 demonstrates that anesthesiology is not immune to the citation of retracted papers.…”