Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
97 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
53 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
44 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
5 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
47 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

Unraveling Retraction Dynamics in COVID-19 Research: Patterns, Reasons, and Implications (2404.15298v1)

Published 26 Mar 2024 in cs.DL

Abstract: Amid the COVID-19 pandemic, while the world sought solutions, some scholars exploited the situation for personal gains through deceptive studies and manipulated data. This paper presents the extent of 400 retracted COVID-19 papers listed by the Retraction Watch database until February 2024. The primary purpose of the research was to analyze journal quality and retraction trends. For all stakeholders involved, such as editors, relevant researchers, and policymakers, evaluating the journal's quality is crucial information since it could help them effectively stop such incidents and their negative effects in the future. The present research results imply that one-fourth of publications were retracted within the first month of their publication, followed by an additional 6\% within six months of publication. One-third of the retractions originated from Q1 journals, with another significant portion coming from Q2 (29.8). A notable percentage of the retracted papers (23.2\%) lacked publishing impact, signifying their publication as conference papers or in journals not indexed by Scopus. An examination of the retraction reasons reveals that one-fourth of retractions were due to numerous causes, mostly in Q2 journals, and another quarter were due to data problems, with the majority happening in Q1 publications. Elsevier retracted 31 of the papers, with the majority published in Q1, followed by Springer (11.5), predominantly in Q2. Retracted papers were mainly associated with the USA, China, and India. In the USA, retractions were primarily from Q1 journals followed by no-impact publications; in China, it was Q1 followed by Q2, and in India, it was Q2 followed by no-impact publications. The study also examined author contributions, revealing that 69.3 were male contributors, with females (30.7) mainly holding middle author positions.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (49)
  1. Twitter engagement with retracted articles: Who, when, and how? arXiv preprint arXiv:2203.04228 .
  2. An “alarming” and “exceptionally high” rate of covid-19 retractions? Accountability in Research 28, 58–59.
  3. Covid-19 medical papers have fewer women first authors than expected. elife 9.
  4. Meta-research: Covid-19 medical papers have fewer women first authors than expected. elife 9, e58807.
  5. Academic journal retractions and the covid-19 pandemic. Journal of primary care & community health 12, 21501327211015592.
  6. Most notable 100 articles of covid-19: an altmetric study based on bibliometric analysis. Irish Journal of Medical Science (1971-) , 1–7.
  7. Misconduct as the main cause for retraction. a descriptive study of retracted publications and their authors. Gaceta sanitaria 33, 356–360.
  8. A comprehensive review of the covid-19 pandemic and the role of iot, drones, ai, blockchain, and 5g in managing its impact. Ieee access 8, 90225–90265.
  9. Characteristics of global retractions of schizophrenia-related publications: A bibliometric analysis. Frontiers in Psychiatry 13, 937330.
  10. Retracted papers on sars-cov-2 and covid-19. British journal of anaesthesia 126, e155–e156.
  11. How covid-19 affected the journal impact factor of high impact medical journals: bibliometric analysis. Journal of Medical Internet Research 24, e43089.
  12. Publications and retracted articles of covid-19 pharmacotherapy-related research: A systematic review. Science progress 104, 00368504211016936.
  13. A bibliometric study of article retractions in technology fields in developing economies countries. Scientometrics 128, 6047–6083.
  14. Misconduct policies, academic culture and career stage, not gender or pressures to publish, affect scientific integrity. PloS one 10, e0127556.
  15. Misconduct accounts for the majority of retracted scientific publications. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 109, 17028–17033.
  16. Inconsistent and incomplete retraction of published research: A cross-sectional study on covid-19 retractions and recommendations to mitigate risks for research, policy and practice. PLoS One 16, e0258935.
  17. General medical publications during covid-19 show increased dissemination despite lower validation. Plos one 16, e0246427.
  18. Retracted articles in oncology in the last three decades: frequency, reasons, and themes. Scientometrics 127, 1841–1865.
  19. Impact of coronavirus outbreaks on science and society: Insights from temporal bibliometry of sars and covid-19. Entropy 23, 626.
  20. Can tweets be used to detect problems early with scientific papers? a case study of three retracted covid-19/sars-cov-2 papers. Scientometrics 126, 5181–5199.
  21. Covid-19: a new virus, but a familiar receptor and cytokine release syndrome. Immunity 52, 731–733.
  22. Evolution of retracted publications in the medical sciences: Citations analysis, bibliometrics, and altmetrics trends. Accountability in Research , 1–16.
  23. Exploring the role of ai, iot and bc during covid-19: A bibliometric and network analysis, in: Computational Intelligence Aided Systems for Healthcare Domain. CRC Press, pp. 167–190.
  24. Cope’s retraction guidelines. The Lancet 374, 1876–1877.
  25. Longitudinal analyses of gender differences in first authorship publications related to covid-19. BMJ open 11, e045176.
  26. Research ethics: a profile of retractions from world class universities. Scientometrics 126, 6871–6889.
  27. Against pandemic research exceptionalism. Science 368, 476–477.
  28. How the scientific community responded to the covid-19 pandemic: a subject-level time-trend bibliometric analysis. PLoS One 16, e0258064.
  29. Misconduct by researchers and authors. Gaceta sanitaria 21, 492–499.
  30. One and a half million medical papers reveal a link between author gender and attention to gender and sex analysis. Nature human behaviour 1, 791–796.
  31. How covid-19 has fundamentally changed clinical research in global health. The Lancet Global Health 9, e711–e720.
  32. Gender inequality in science. Science 347, 234–235.
  33. How covid-19 is changing research culture. London: Digital Science .
  34. The impacts of COVID-19 on the research enterprise: A landscape review. Technical Report. Ithaka S+R.
  35. Retractions and post-retraction citations in the covid-19 infodemic: is academia spreading misinformation? Liinc em Revista 17, e5593–e5593.
  36. Team size and retracted citations reveal the patterns of retractions from 1981 to 2020. Scientometrics 126, 8363–8374.
  37. Research done wrong: A comprehensive investigation of retracted publications in covid-19. Accountability in research 30, 393–406.
  38. Silently withdrawn or retracted preprints related to covid-19 are a scholarly threat and a potential public health risk: theoretical arguments and suggested recommendations. Online Information Review 45, 751–757.
  39. Optimizing peer review to minimize the risk of retracting covid-19-related literature. Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 24, 21–26.
  40. Retracted publications in brics countries: an analytical study. Scientometrics 128, 6313–6333.
  41. Retractions in the medical literature: who is responsible for scientific integrity? AMWA Journal: American Medical Writers Association Journal 26.
  42. Retractions in the scientific literature: do authors deliberately commit research fraud? Journal of medical ethics 37, 113–117.
  43. Retracted covid-19 papers and the levels of “citation pollution”: A preliminary analysis and directions for further research. Cahiers de La Documentation–Bladen Voor Documentatie 3, 206–218.
  44. Retracted coronavirus (covid-19) papers. Retraction Watch .
  45. Retraction notices: Who authored them? Publications 6, 2.
  46. A cross-disciplinary and severity-based study of author-related reasons for retraction. Accountability in Research , 1–25.
  47. An alarming retraction rate for scientific publications on coronavirus disease 2019 (covid-19). Accountability in research 28, 47–53.
  48. Sustained rise in retractions in the life sciences literature during the pandemic years 2020 and 2021. Publications 10, 29.
  49. Research misconduct in hospitals is spreading: A bibliometric analysis of retracted papers from chinese university-affiliated hospitals. Journal of Data and Information Science 8, 84–101.
User Edit Pencil Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
Authors (3)
  1. Parul Khurana (12 papers)
  2. Ziya Uddin (7 papers)
  3. Kiran Sharma (41 papers)
Citations (2)

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.

X Twitter Logo Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com