Retractions in cancer research: a systematic survey

Abstract Background The annual number of retracted publications in the scientific literature is rapidly increasing. The objective of this study was to determine the frequency and reason for retraction of cancer publications and to determine how journals in the cancer field handle retracted articles....

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Anthony Bozzo, Kamal Bali, Nathan Evaniew, Michelle Ghert
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMC 2017-05-01
Series:Research Integrity and Peer Review
Subjects:
Online Access:http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s41073-017-0031-1
id doaj-cbd15fa91ad24ad39ab55ae2e4fed7c8
record_format Article
spelling doaj-cbd15fa91ad24ad39ab55ae2e4fed7c82020-11-25T01:30:43ZengBMCResearch Integrity and Peer Review2058-86152017-05-01211710.1186/s41073-017-0031-1Retractions in cancer research: a systematic surveyAnthony Bozzo0Kamal Bali1Nathan Evaniew2Michelle Ghert3Division of Orthopaedic Surgery, Department of Surgery, McMaster UniversityDivision of Orthopaedic Surgery, Department of Surgery, McMaster UniversityDivision of Orthopaedic Surgery, Department of Surgery, McMaster UniversityHamilton Health Sciences, Juravinski Hospital and Cancer CenterAbstract Background The annual number of retracted publications in the scientific literature is rapidly increasing. The objective of this study was to determine the frequency and reason for retraction of cancer publications and to determine how journals in the cancer field handle retracted articles. Methods We searched three online databases (MEDLINE, Embase, The Cochrane Library) from database inception until 2015 for retracted journal publications related to cancer research. For each article, the reason for retraction was categorized as plagiarism, duplicate publication, fraud, error, authorship issues, or ethical issues. Accessibility of the retracted article was defined as intact, removed, or available but with a watermark over each page. Descriptive data was collected on each retracted article including number of citations, journal name and impact factor, study design, and time between publication and retraction. The publications were screened in duplicated and two reviewers extracted and categorized data. Results Following database search and article screening, we identified 571 retracted cancer publications. The majority (76.4%) of cancer retractions were issued in the most recent decade, with 16.6 and 6.7% of the retractions in the prior two decades respectively. Retractions were issued by journals with impact factors ranging from 0 (discontinued) to 55.8. The average impact factor was 5.4 (median 3.54, IQR 1.8–5.5). On average, a retracted article was cited 45 times (median 18, IQR 6–51), with a range of 0–742. Reasons for retraction include plagiarism (14.4%), fraud (28.4%), duplicate publication (18.2%), error (24.2%), authorship issues (3.9%), and ethical issues (2.1%). The reason for retraction was not stated in 9.8% of cases. Twenty-nine percent of retracted articles remain available online in their original form. Conclusions Retractions in cancer research are increasing in frequency at a similar rate to all biomedical research retractions. Cancer retractions are largely due to academic misconduct. Consequences to cancer patients, the public at large, and the research community can be substantial and should be addressed with future research. Despite the implications of this important issue, some cancer journals currently fall short of the current guidelines for clearly stating the reason for retraction and identifying the publication as retracted.http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s41073-017-0031-1CancerCancer researchOncologyOncology researchResearch ethicsRetraction
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Anthony Bozzo
Kamal Bali
Nathan Evaniew
Michelle Ghert
spellingShingle Anthony Bozzo
Kamal Bali
Nathan Evaniew
Michelle Ghert
Retractions in cancer research: a systematic survey
Research Integrity and Peer Review
Cancer
Cancer research
Oncology
Oncology research
Research ethics
Retraction
author_facet Anthony Bozzo
Kamal Bali
Nathan Evaniew
Michelle Ghert
author_sort Anthony Bozzo
title Retractions in cancer research: a systematic survey
title_short Retractions in cancer research: a systematic survey
title_full Retractions in cancer research: a systematic survey
title_fullStr Retractions in cancer research: a systematic survey
title_full_unstemmed Retractions in cancer research: a systematic survey
title_sort retractions in cancer research: a systematic survey
publisher BMC
series Research Integrity and Peer Review
issn 2058-8615
publishDate 2017-05-01
description Abstract Background The annual number of retracted publications in the scientific literature is rapidly increasing. The objective of this study was to determine the frequency and reason for retraction of cancer publications and to determine how journals in the cancer field handle retracted articles. Methods We searched three online databases (MEDLINE, Embase, The Cochrane Library) from database inception until 2015 for retracted journal publications related to cancer research. For each article, the reason for retraction was categorized as plagiarism, duplicate publication, fraud, error, authorship issues, or ethical issues. Accessibility of the retracted article was defined as intact, removed, or available but with a watermark over each page. Descriptive data was collected on each retracted article including number of citations, journal name and impact factor, study design, and time between publication and retraction. The publications were screened in duplicated and two reviewers extracted and categorized data. Results Following database search and article screening, we identified 571 retracted cancer publications. The majority (76.4%) of cancer retractions were issued in the most recent decade, with 16.6 and 6.7% of the retractions in the prior two decades respectively. Retractions were issued by journals with impact factors ranging from 0 (discontinued) to 55.8. The average impact factor was 5.4 (median 3.54, IQR 1.8–5.5). On average, a retracted article was cited 45 times (median 18, IQR 6–51), with a range of 0–742. Reasons for retraction include plagiarism (14.4%), fraud (28.4%), duplicate publication (18.2%), error (24.2%), authorship issues (3.9%), and ethical issues (2.1%). The reason for retraction was not stated in 9.8% of cases. Twenty-nine percent of retracted articles remain available online in their original form. Conclusions Retractions in cancer research are increasing in frequency at a similar rate to all biomedical research retractions. Cancer retractions are largely due to academic misconduct. Consequences to cancer patients, the public at large, and the research community can be substantial and should be addressed with future research. Despite the implications of this important issue, some cancer journals currently fall short of the current guidelines for clearly stating the reason for retraction and identifying the publication as retracted.
topic Cancer
Cancer research
Oncology
Oncology research
Research ethics
Retraction
url http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s41073-017-0031-1
work_keys_str_mv AT anthonybozzo retractionsincancerresearchasystematicsurvey
AT kamalbali retractionsincancerresearchasystematicsurvey
AT nathanevaniew retractionsincancerresearchasystematicsurvey
AT michelleghert retractionsincancerresearchasystematicsurvey
_version_ 1725090340166172672