Media and social media attention to retracted articles according to Altmetric

Abstract

The number of retracted articles has grown fast. However, the extent to which researchers and the public are made adequately aware of these retractions and how the media and social media respond to them remains unknown. Here, we aimed to evaluate the media and social media attention received by retracted articles and assess also the attention they receive post-retraction versus pre-retraction. We downloaded all records of retracted literature maintained by the Retraction Watch Database and originally published between January 1, 2010 to December 31, 2015. For all 3,008 retracted articles with a separate DOI for the original and its retraction, we downloaded the respective Altmetric Attention Score (AAS) (from Altmetric) and citation count (from Crossref), for the original article and its retraction notice on June 6, 2018. We also compared the AAS of a random sample of 572 retracted full journal articles available on PubMed to that of unretracted full articles matched from the same issue and journal. 1,687 (56.1%) of retracted research articles received some amount of Altmetric attention, and 165 (5.5%) were even considered popular (AAS>20). 31 (1.0%) of 2,953 with a record on Crossref received >100 citations by June 6, 2018. Popular articles received substantially more attention than their retraction, even after adjusting for attention received post-retraction (Median difference, 29; 95% CI, 17–61). Unreliable results were the most frequent reason for retraction of popular articles (32; 19%), while fake peer review was the most common reason (421; 15%) for the retraction of other articles. In comparison to matched articles, retracted articles tended to receive more Altmetric attention (23/31 matched groups; P-value, 0.01), even after adjusting for attention received post-retraction. Our findings reveal that retracted articles may receive high attention from media and social media and that for popular articles, pre-retraction attention far outweighs post-retraction attention.

Bibliometric and Altmetric Analysis of Retracted Articles on COVID-19

“…35 There has been evidence of social media spreading the misinformation in retracted articles making them so popular that its retraction is deemed insignificant at times. 6 36 37 A similar study done on post-retraction AAS shows that most retracted articles and their retraction notice receive media and social media attention. 6 In fact, retracted articles tend to receive more media and social media attention than very similar, matched unretracted articles.…”

“… 6 36 37 A similar study done on post-retraction AAS shows that most retracted articles and their retraction notice receive media and social media attention. 6 In fact, retracted articles tend to receive more media and social media attention than very similar, matched unretracted articles. The cause of this misinformation popularity, without any mention of its retraction, can be partly blamed on journals.…”

“…However, post-retraction spread of misinformation through social media has been an ongoing concern and the exponential rise in COVID-19 related articles has exacerbated the phenomenon. 6 With the tentative and sensitive COVID-19 related information, readers have fallen prey to the infodemic regardless of the attempts made in retraction and correction. Moreover, a lesser known concern is the preprint publication of false research that has increased since the COVID-19 pandemic.…”

“…11 It is a reliable form of calculating the total outreach an article has received including that through social media platforms such as Twitter, Facebook, video uploaders and news. 6 We hope to highlight the role of social media in advertising retracted articles and its effect on the spread of COVID-19 linked misinformation.…”

The impact of retracted randomised controlled trials on systematic reviews and clinical practice guidelines: a meta-epidemiological study

“…Notable recent examples include a RCT of ivermectin [7] and a cohort study of hydroxychloroquine, both for COVID-19 [8]. An increasing number of studies have investigated the fate of such retracted studies: some studies have evaluated the impact of retracted articles on social media [9] or reported on the ongoing citations of retracted articles in some specialties such as radiation oncology, dentistry or COVID-19 [6,10–12]. The Cochrane has developed a new policy to address potentially problematic studies including retraction [4].…”