ReTracker: Actively and automatically matching retraction metadata in zotero

Cheng, Yi‐Yun; Parulian, Nikolaus Nova; Hsiao, Tzu Kun; Dinh, Ly; Sarol, Janina; Schneider, Jodi

doi:10.1002/pra2.32

Cited by 4 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Reference management software packages do not systematically collect or display retraction status, though new tools inside reference management software are emerging, including ReTracker (Cheng et al 2019) and, more recently, Zotero's retraction notification based on the Retraction Watch Database (Stillman 2019). As of 2020, not all citation styles indicate how to format a citation to a retracted paper, and manual correction is needed in order to add "[retracted in (citation)]" as required by the American Medical Association Manual of Style when using common reference management software such as EndNote, RefWorks, and Zotero (Suelzer et al 2019).…”

Section: Accessibility and Visibility Of Retracted Papers And Their Rmentioning

confidence: 99%

Continued post-retraction citation of a fraudulent clinical trial report, 11 years after it was retracted for falsifying data

Schneider

Hill

et al. 2020

Scientometrics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper presents a case study of long-term post-retraction citation to falsified clinical trial data (Matsuyama et al. in Chest 128(6):3817–3827, 2005. 10.1378/chest.128.6.3817), demonstrating problems with how the current digital library environment communicates retraction status. Eleven years after its retraction, the paper continues to be cited positively and uncritically to support a medical nutrition intervention, without mention of its 2008 retraction for falsifying data. To date no high quality clinical trials reporting on the efficacy of omega-3 fatty acids on reducing inflammatory markers have been published. Our paper uses network analysis, citation context analysis, and retraction status visibility analysis to illustrate the potential for extended propagation of misinformation over a citation network, updating and extending a case study of the first 6 years of post-retraction citation (Fulton et al. in Publications 3(1):7–26, 2015. 10.3390/publications3010017). The current study covers 148 direct citations from 2006 through 2019 and their 2542 second-generation citations and assesses retraction status visibility of the case study paper and its retraction notice on 12 digital platforms as of 2020. The retraction is not mentioned in 96% (107/112) of direct post-retraction citations for which we were able to conduct citation context analysis. Over 41% (44/107) of direct post-retraction citations that do not mention the retraction describe the case study paper in detail, giving a risk of diffusing misinformation from the case paper. We analyze 152 second-generation citations to the most recent 35 direct citations (2010–2019) that do not mention the retraction but do mention methods or results of the case paper, finding 23 possible diffusions of misinformation from these non-direct citations to the case paper. Link resolving errors from databases show a significant challenge in a reader reaching the retraction notice via a database search. Only 1/8 databases (and 1/9 database records) consistently resolved the retraction notice to its full-text correctly in our tests. Although limited to evaluation of a single case (N = 1), this work demonstrates how retracted research can continue to spread and how the current information environment contributes to this problem.

show abstract

Section: Accessibility and Visibility Of Retracted Papers And Their Rmentioning

confidence: 99%

Continued post-retraction citation of a fraudulent clinical trial report, 11 years after it was retracted for falsifying data

Schneider

Hill

et al. 2020

Scientometrics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Aktuálne sú v databáze informácie o vyše 40 000 stiahnutých článkoch (marec 2023) a pomáha zabraňovať citovaniu stiahnutých článkov tým, že poskytuje informácie pre systémy automatického upozorňovania na stiahnuté články v citačných manažéroch EndNote, LibKey, Papers a Zotero (napr. Cheng et al 2019).…”

Section: Dôvody Retrakcieunclassified

Retrakcie vo vedeckom publikovaní

Stožická,

Dobbersteinová

2023

ITlib

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An investigation into the impact and implications of published papers from retracted research: systematic search of affected literature

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveAnalyses of the impact of a body of clinical trial reports subject to research misconduct have been few. Our objective was to examine the impact on clinically relevant research of a group of researchers’ trial reports (‘affected trial reports’) affected by research misconduct, and whether identification of misconduct invoked a reappraisal.DesignIn 2016, we used five databases and search engines to identify ‘citing publications’, that is, guidelines, systematic and other reviews, and clinical trials citing any of 12 affected trial reports, published 1998–2011, eventually retracted for research misconduct. The affected trial reports were assessed more likely to have had impact because they had hip fracture outcomes and were in journals with impact factor >4. Two authors assessed whether findings of the citing publications would change if the affected trial reports were removed. In 2018, we searched for evidence that the citing publications had undertaken a reassessment as a result of the potential influence of the affected trial reports.ResultsBy 2016 the affected trial reports were cited in 1158 publications, including 68 systematic reviews, meta-analyses, narrative reviews, guidelines and clinical trials. We judged that 13 guidelines, systematic or other reviews would likely change their findings if the affected trial reports were removed, and in another eight it was unclear if findings would change. By 2018, only one of the 68 citing publications, a systematic review, appeared to have undertaken a reassessment, which led to a correction.ConclusionsWe found evidence that this group of affected trial reports distorted the evidence base. Correction of these distortions is slow, uncoordinated and inconsistent. Unless there is a rapid, systematic, coordinated approach by bibliographic databases, authors, journals and publishers to mitigate the impact of known cases of research misconduct, patients, other researchers and their funders may continue to be adversely affected.

show abstract

ReTracker: Actively and automatically matching retraction metadata in zotero

Cited by 4 publications

References 13 publications

Continued post-retraction citation of a fraudulent clinical trial report, 11 years after it was retracted for falsifying data

Continued post-retraction citation of a fraudulent clinical trial report, 11 years after it was retracted for falsifying data

Retrakcie vo vedeckom publikovaní

An investigation into the impact and implications of published papers from retracted research: systematic search of affected literature

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About