Assessment of Citations of the Retracted Article by Wakefield et al With Fraudulent Claims of an Association Between Vaccination and Autism
Assessment of Citations of the Retracted Article by Wakefield et al With Fraudulent Claims of an Association Between Vaccination and Autism
复制标题
DOI：
10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.15552
复制
发表时间：
2019-11-01
影响因子：
13.8
通讯作者：
Witkowski, Elizabeth
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Suelzer, Elizabeth M.;Deal, Jennifer;Witkowski, Elizabeth
重要性被引用的次数可以用来显示一篇文章的影响力或衡量一项研究研究的有效性。Wakefield等人的文章欺骗性地报道了疫苗接种和自闭症之间的关联，即使在被撤回后，它仍在继续积累引文。目的检查引用Wakefield等人1998年文章的学术文献的特征，并调查作者是否准确地引用了撤回的参考文献。这项对引用Wakefield等人1998年文章的学术出版物的横断面书目分析的设计、背景和参与者引用的参考文献来自于2019年3月11日执行的Web of Science Core Collection搜索。总共确定了1211篇文章，其中58篇引用作品被排除在外，因为它们是非英文出版物或评价者无法找到Wakefield等人对这项研究的引用。引用作品包括书籍、研究文章、信件、社论、新闻和其他学术文献。对Wakefield等人文章的引用由两位评审者以盲法筛选的方式识别和分析。评价者将每个引用的特征分配给每个引用，并指出是否有文件记录。主要结果和衡量Wakefield等人对这篇文章的引用的特征被归类为否定、肯定或对比；如果不是，则为说服性；如果不是，则为假设性、敷衍性、方法论或概念性。结果在1153篇引用文献中，最常见的引文特征是负面(838篇，72.7%)，其次是敷衍性(106篇，9.2%)和肯定(94篇，8.2%)。在2005年至2010年出版的322篇引用著作中，共有123篇(38.2%)记载了部分撤回。在2010年撤回说明发表后，2011年至2018年期间记录部分撤回和/或撤回通知的引用作品的百分比增加到502篇中的360篇(71.7%)。结论和相关性自Wakefield等人的文章最初发表以来，作者大多否定了这项研究的结果。相当多的作者没有记录Wakefield等人对这篇文章的撤回。研究结果表明，需要从出版商、书目数据库和引文管理软件方面进行改进，以确保撤回的文章得到准确的记录。
IMPORTANCE The number of citations can be used to show the influence of an article or to measure the validity of a research study. The article by Wakefield et al that fraudulently reported an association between vaccination and autism continues to accumulate citations even after it was retracted.OBJECTIVES To examine the characteristics of citations from scholarly literature that reference the 1998 article by Wakefield et al and to investigate whether authors are accurately citing retracted references.DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS In this cross-sectional bibliographic analysis of the scholarly publications that cited a 1998 article by Wakefield et al, cited references were collected from a Web of Science Core Collection search performed on March 11, 2019. A total of 1211 articles were identified, with 58 citing works excluded because they were non-English-language publications or the citation to the study by Wakefield et al could not be located by reviewers. Citing works consisted of books, research articles, letters, editorials, news items, and other scholarly literature. Citations to the article by Wakefield et al were identified and analyzed by 2 reviewers in a blinded screening. Reviewers assigned a characteristic to each citation and indicated whether the retraction was documented.MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The characteristics of citations to the article by Wakefield et al, were categorized as negative, affirmative, or contrastive; if not, persuasive; and if not, assumptive, perfunctory, methodologic, or conceptual. Whether the partial retraction or notice of retraction was included in the citing work was also documented.RESULTS Among the 1153 citing works included in this analysis, the most common citation characteristics were negative (838 [72.7%]) followed by perfunctory (106 [9.2%]) and affirmative (94 [8.2%]). A total of 123 of 322 citing works (38.2%) published between 2005 and 2010 documented the partial retraction. After the notof retraction was published in 2010, the percentage of citing works that documented the partial retraction and/or notice of retraction between 2011 and 2018 increased to 360 of 502 (71.7%).CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Since the article by Wakefield et al was initially published, authors have mostly negated the findings of the study. A significant number of authors did not document retractions of the article by Wakefield et al. The findings suggest that improvements are needed from publishers, bibliographic databases, and citation management software to ensure that retracted articles are accurately documented.