Retractions and post-retraction citations in the COVID-19 infodemic: is Academia spreading misinformation?

Abstract

The speed in producing information and the rush to publish scientific articles on COVID-19 in several knowledge areas have resulted in what is known as an infodemic also in the scientific field, potentially producing inaccurate information and sources of misinformation at scholarly communication. This has led to some articles being retracted or withdrawn due to unintentional errors or deliberate misconduct, but they continue to be cited. This article (i) gives an overview of the COVID-19 retracted articles and preprints, and (ii) analyses a set of post-retraction citations in the context of the COVID-19 infodemic. We analyzed 56 retracted articles and preprints by using the list available in the section on “retracted coronavirus (COVID-19) papers” in the Retraction Watch (RW) webpage. We found that 64.3% of these retractions were articles published in journals, 33.9% were uploaded in preprints servers, and 1.8% conference papers. We also analyzed 162 eligible articles out of 612 records identified by using the Google Scholar search engine. This research found that an article from The Lancet continued to be cited even after being retracted. In this case, we identified 214 post-retraction citations, of which 38% were negative (n=81), 32% were neutral (n=69), and 30% were positive citations (n=64)

Continued use of retracted papers: Temporal trends in citations and (lack of) awareness of retractions shown in citation contexts in biomedicine

“… Theis-Mahon and Bakker (2020) reported that 475 (69.34%) out of the 685 postretraction citations to retracted dentistry papers were positive. Santos-d’Amorim et al (2021) investigated 214 postretraction citations to one retracted Covid-19 paper and identified 64 (30%) positive, 81 (38%) negative, and 69 (32%) neutral citations. Studies that more deeply analyzed citation contexts (e.g., beyond the tone) focused only on a single retracted paper and its citations ( Fulton, Coates et al, 2015 ; Schneider et al, 2020 ; Suelzer et al, 2019 ; van der Vet & Nijveen, 2016 ).…”

Reasons and implications of retracted articles in Brazil

“…The efforts to identify flaws in research are not new, but the concerns associated with the reliability of data and the reproducibility of COVID-19 studies have ignited debates on the subject (Bommier;Stoeklé;Hervé, 2021; EVIDENCE ON RETRACTIONS IN BRAZIL https://doi.org/10.1590/2318-0889202133e210001 Bramstedt, 2020;Santos-d' Amorim;Melo;Santos, 2021;Vlasschaert;Topf;Hiremath, 2020). Aiming to improve these mechanisms, the editors of The Lancet Group, after the negative repercussions involving a retraction in The Lancet (Mehra;Ruschitzka;Patel, 2020;The Lancet Editors, 2020a), have redefined their peer review process.…”

“…However, over the years and more recently, in the scenario of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, serial retractions, including cases in reputable journals such as The Lancet and the New England Journal of Medicine, have promoted debates on the issue (Bramstedt, 2020;Freckelton, 2020). Even after retraction and wide media dissemination (Piller, 2021), some articles continue to be cited, generating misinformation, setbacks and, within the scope of issues associated with the ongoing pandemic, public health problems that could impact the entire globe (Péretz et al, 2021;Santos-d' Amorim;Melo;Santos, 2021).…”

“…Third, there are discussions about productivism and its "publish or perish" premise, which generate intense competition among scientists (Feenstra et al, 2021;Garfield, 1987;Jawaid, 2016;Lei;Zhang, 2018;Oliveira, 2015;Oransky, 2015), despite some dissent on this theme Costas;Larivière, 2015). And fourth, one encounters discussions associated with the post-retraction-citations problem, when retracted research is used to support and validate subsequent research (Santos-d' Amorim;Melo;Santos, 2021). Thus, the phenomenon of misinformation is also present in science, as reminded by Bar-Ilan and Halevi's (2020) allusion to retracted articles as the scientific version of fake news.…”

Integridade na Pesquisa no âmbito da conjuntura pandêmica de COVID-19: um mapeamento bibliométrico

“…Khalifa e Ahmed (2021), por exemplo, identificaram casos de artigos científicos que foram aceitos no primeiro dia de submissão. É nesse contexto que a noção de infodemia também é percebida na comunicação científica, cuja torrente de artigos, preprints, protocolos e relatórios de pesquisas conduzidos nesse senso de urgência dão margem tanto para a incidência de erros não intencionais como para a má conduta deliberada na pesquisa científica (Bramstedt, 2020;Jesus-Silva & Antonio, 2021;Santos-d'Amorim, Melo, & Santos, 2021;Whitmore et al, 2020).…”