Fate of articles that warranted retraction due to ethical concerns: a descriptive cross-sectional study.
Fate of articles that warranted retraction due to ethical concerns: a descriptive cross-sectional study.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1371/journal.pone.0085846
复制
发表时间：
2014
期刊：
影响因子：
3.7
通讯作者：
Tramèr MR
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Elia N;Wager E;Tramèr MR
为了研究期刊对德国莱茵-普法尔茨州立医学会出于伦理考虑撤回88篇文章的请求的反应，并检查由此导致的撤回是否遵循了已公布的指导方针。描述性横断面研究。麻醉学家博尔特博士发表了88篇文章(18种期刊)，这些文章理应撤回。根据出版物道德委员会的建议，在以下情况下，我们认为撤回是足够的：发布撤回通知，链接撤回的文章，在标题中指明撤回文章的标题和作者，解释撤回的原因和谁对撤回负责，以及撤回的文章可以自由获取并使用保留原始内容的透明水印标记。两位作者独立提取了数据(2013年1月)，并联系了主编和出版商，以澄清撤回不足的情况。5篇文章(6%)符合适当撤回的所有标准。9篇(10%)未被撤回(未发布撤回通知，全文未作标记)。发布了79份撤回通知(90%)，76份(86%)可免费查阅，但只有15份(17%)完整。73篇全文文章(83%)被标记为撤回，其中14篇(16%)具有隐藏部分原始内容的不透明水印，11篇(13%)删除了所有原始内容。59件(67%)退回物品可自由取用。一名主编表示，个人问题是不完全撤回的原因，八名主编指责他们的出版商。两家出版商称，博尔特博士的合著者发出了法律威胁，阻止他们撤回文章。撤回文章的指导方针没有得到完全遵守。需要澄清出版商在撤回过程中的作用，并需要对撤回的文章进行标记的标准。目前还不清楚谁应该检查撤稿是否正确进行。法律保障是必要的，以允许违背作者意愿撤回文章。
To study journals' responses to a request from the State Medical Association of Rheinland-Pfalz, Germany, to retract 88 articles due to ethical concerns, and to check whether the resulting retractions followed published guidelines. Descriptive cross-sectional study. 88 articles (18 journals) by the anaesthesiologist Dr. Boldt, that warranted retraction. According to the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics, we regarded a retraction as adequate when a retraction notice was published, linked to the retracted article, identified the title and authors of the retracted article in its heading, explained the reason and who took responsibility for the retraction, and when the retracted article was freely accessible and marked using a transparent watermark that preserved original content. Two authors extracted data independently (January 2013) and contacted editors-in-chief and publishers for clarification in cases of inadequate retraction. Five articles (6%) fulfilled all criteria for adequate retraction. Nine (10%) were not retracted (no retraction notice published, full text article not marked). 79 (90%) retraction notices were published, 76 (86%) were freely accessible, but only 15 (17%) were complete. 73 (83%) full text articles were marked as retracted, of which 14 (16%) had an opaque watermark hiding parts of the original content, and 11 (13%) had all original content deleted. 59 (67%) retracted articles were freely accessible. One editor-in-chief stated personal problems as a reason for incomplete retractions, eight blamed their publishers. Two publishers cited legal threats from Dr. Boldt's co-authors which prevented them from retracting articles. Guidelines for retracting articles are incompletely followed. The role of publishers in the retraction process needs to be clarified and standards are needed on marking retracted articles. It remains unclear who should check that retractions are done properly. Legal safeguards are required to allow retraction of articles against the wishes of authors.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
39.2
作者：
Sox, HC;Rennie, D
通讯作者：
Rennie, D
影响因子：
120.7
作者：
GARFIELD, E;WELLJAMSDOROF, A
通讯作者：
WELLJAMSDOROF, A
影响因子：
120.7
作者：
WHITELY, WP;RENNIE, D;HAFNER, AW
通讯作者：
HAFNER, AW
影响因子：
4.1
作者：
Wager, Elizabeth;Williams, Peter
通讯作者：
Williams, Peter
影响因子：
120.7
作者：
PFEIFER, MP;SNODGRASS, GL
通讯作者：
SNODGRASS, GL