Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.
Scientific Integrity and TransparencyUnder Scrutiny:Lessons from Retraction Watch3rdWorld Conference on Research Integrity...
Always Another Story…
Retractions on the Risehttp://pmretract.heroku.com/byyear
Most Retractions Due to MisconductPNAS online October 1, 2012
How Long Do Retractions Take?
How Long Do Retractions Take?
How Long Do Retractions Take?
How Long Do Retractions Take?
What Happens to Retracted Papers’Citations?-Assn of College & Research Libraries 2011
What Happens to Retracted Papers’Citations?Budd et al, 1999:• Retracted articles received more than 2,000 post-retraction ...
What Happens to Retracted Papers’Citations?
What Happens to Retracted Papers’Citations?“…annual citations of an article drop by 65%following retraction, controlling f...
Do Journals Get the Word Out?
Do Journals Get the Word Out?“Journals often fail to alert the naïve reader;31.8% of retracted papers were not noted asret...
Do Journals Get the Word Out?How the Naïve Reader is Alerted to RetractionsWhere retraction noted Retracted papers, n (%)W...
The Euphemisms“unattributed overlap”
The Euphemisms“unattributed overlap”an “approach”
The Euphemisms“unattributed overlap”an “approach”“a duplicate of a paper that has already beenpublished”…by other authors
The Euphemisms“unattributed overlap”an “approach”“a duplicate of a paper that has already beenpublished”…by other authors“...
The Euphemisms“unattributed overlap”an “approach”“a duplicate of a paper that has already beenpublished”…by other authors“...
Puzzling Policies
Puzzling Policies
Trend: Mega-Corrections
Trend: Mega-CorrectionsIn this Letter we made errors in representative image choice,including mislabelling of images or ch...
Trend: Mega-CorrectionsIn this Letter we made errors in representative image choice,including mislabelling of images or ch...
Trend: Mega-CorrectionsIn this Letter we made errors in representative image choice,including mislabelling of images or ch...
Trend: Mega-CorrectionsIn this Letter we made errors in representative image choice,including mislabelling of images or ch...
Anonymous Whistleblowers Step Uphttp://www.labtimes.org
Blogs Get Aggressivehttp://abnormalscienceblog.wordpress.com/
Blogs Get Aggressive
Blogs Get Aggressivehttp://md-anderson-cc.blogspot.com
Blogs Get Aggressivehttp://www.science-fraud.org/
Journals Are Listening
Journals Are Listening
Journals Are Listening
Journals Are Listening
Contact Infoivan-oransky@erols.comhttp://retractionwatch.com@ivanoranskyThanks to Nancy Lapid, Reuters Health
Scientific Integrity and Transparency Under Scrutiny: Lessons from Retraction Watch
Scientific Integrity and Transparency Under Scrutiny: Lessons from Retraction Watch
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Scientific Integrity and Transparency Under Scrutiny: Lessons from Retraction Watch

11,039 views

Published on

Presentation at the 3rd World Conference on Research Integrity, Montreal, May 7, 2013

Published in: Technology, Business
  • Be the first to comment

Scientific Integrity and Transparency Under Scrutiny: Lessons from Retraction Watch

  1. 1. Scientific Integrity and TransparencyUnder Scrutiny:Lessons from Retraction Watch3rdWorld Conference on Research IntegrityMontrealMay 7, 2013Ivan OranskyCo-founder, Retraction Watchhttp://retractionwatch.com@ivanoransky
  2. 2. Always Another Story…
  3. 3. Retractions on the Risehttp://pmretract.heroku.com/byyear
  4. 4. Most Retractions Due to MisconductPNAS online October 1, 2012
  5. 5. How Long Do Retractions Take?
  6. 6. How Long Do Retractions Take?
  7. 7. How Long Do Retractions Take?
  8. 8. How Long Do Retractions Take?
  9. 9. What Happens to Retracted Papers’Citations?-Assn of College & Research Libraries 2011
  10. 10. What Happens to Retracted Papers’Citations?Budd et al, 1999:• Retracted articles received more than 2,000 post-retraction citations; less than 8% of citationsacknowledged the retraction• Preliminary study of the present data shows thatcontinued citation remains a problem• Of 391 citations analyzed, only 6% acknowledgethe retraction
  11. 11. What Happens to Retracted Papers’Citations?
  12. 12. What Happens to Retracted Papers’Citations?“…annual citations of an article drop by 65%following retraction, controlling for article ageand calendar year. In the years prior toretraction, there is no such decline, implyingthat retractions are unanticipated by thescientific community.”
  13. 13. Do Journals Get the Word Out?
  14. 14. Do Journals Get the Word Out?“Journals often fail to alert the naïve reader;31.8% of retracted papers were not noted asretracted in any way.”
  15. 15. Do Journals Get the Word Out?How the Naïve Reader is Alerted to RetractionsWhere retraction noted Retracted papers, n (%)Watermark on pdf 305 (41.1)Journal website 248 (33.4)Not noted anywhere 236 (31.8)Note appended to pdf 128 (17.3)pdf deleted from website 98 (13.2)
  16. 16. The Euphemisms“unattributed overlap”
  17. 17. The Euphemisms“unattributed overlap”an “approach”
  18. 18. The Euphemisms“unattributed overlap”an “approach”“a duplicate of a paper that has already beenpublished”…by other authors
  19. 19. The Euphemisms“unattributed overlap”an “approach”“a duplicate of a paper that has already beenpublished”…by other authors“significant originality issue”
  20. 20. The Euphemisms“unattributed overlap”an “approach”“a duplicate of a paper that has already beenpublished”…by other authors“significant originality issue”“Some sentences…are directly taken from otherpapers, which could be viewed as a form ofplagiarism”
  21. 21. Puzzling Policies
  22. 22. Puzzling Policies
  23. 23. Trend: Mega-Corrections
  24. 24. Trend: Mega-CorrectionsIn this Letter we made errors in representative image choice,including mislabelling of images or choosing an image fromthe inappropriate genotype. In all cases, choice of imageswas completely independent of the data analysis and sonone of the conclusions in our original Letter are affected.We apologise for any confusion these errors may havecaused.
  25. 25. Trend: Mega-CorrectionsIn this Letter we made errors in representative image choice,including mislabelling of images or choosing an image fromthe inappropriate genotype. In all cases, choice of imageswas completely independent of the data analysis and so noneof the conclusions in our original Letter are affected. Weapologise for any confusion these errors may have caused.Figure 1a depicts a Tbr1 staining of the adult mouse cortexfor four different genotypes. In the process of choosingrepresentative pictures that reflect the results of ouranalysis shown in Fig. 1b, cropped images from originalpictures were inadvertently mislabelled and usedincorrectly. We provide below a corrected version of Fig. 1awith new representative images for the following genotypes:WT and Reln1/1;Efnb32/2. A new high-magnification picturefor WT is also shown in the two rightmost panels. Originalimages for every genotype and additional examples areshown in the Supplementary Information of thisCorrigendum.Figure 1a depicts a Tbr1 staining of the adult mouse cortexfor four different genotypes. In the process of choosingrepresentative pictures that reflect the results of ouranalysis shown in Fig. 1b, cropped images from originalpictures were inadvertently mislabelled and usedincorrectly. We provide below a corrected version of Fig. 1awith new representative images for the following genotypes:WT and Reln1/1;Efnb32/2. A new high-magnification picturefor WT is also shown in the two rightmost panels. Originalimages for every genotype and additional examples areshown in the Supplementary Information of thisCorrigendum.
  26. 26. Trend: Mega-CorrectionsIn this Letter we made errors in representative image choice,including mislabelling of images or choosing an image fromthe inappropriate genotype. In all cases, choice of imageswas completely independent of the data analysis and so noneof the conclusions in our original Letter are affected. Weapologise for any confusion these errors may have caused.Figure 1a depicts a Tbr1 staining of the adult mouse cortexfor four different genotypes. In the process of choosingrepresentative pictures that reflect the results of ouranalysis shown in Fig. 1b, cropped images from originalpictures were inadvertently mislabelled and usedincorrectly. We provide below a corrected version of Fig. 1awith new representative images for the following genotypes:WT and Reln1/1;Efnb32/2. A new high-magnification picturefor WT is also shown in the two rightmost panels. Originalimages for every genotype and additional examples areshown in the Supplementary Information of thisCorrigendum.Figure 1a depicts a Tbr1 staining of the adult mouse cortexfor four different genotypes. In the process of choosingrepresentative pictures that reflect the results of ouranalysis shown in Fig. 1b, cropped images from originalpictures were inadvertently mislabelled and usedincorrectly. We provide below a corrected version of Fig. 1awith new representative images for the following genotypes:WT and Reln1/1;Efnb32/2. A new high-magnification picturefor WT is also shown in the two rightmost panels. Originalimages for every genotype and additional examples areshown in the Supplementary Information of thisCorrigendum.Figure 1c depicts a Brn1 staining of the E17.5 mouse cortex forfive different genotypes. In the process of figure assemblycropped images from original pictures were inadvertentlymislabelled and used incorrectly. We provide below acorrected Fig. 1c with a new image for Reln1/1; Efnb3–/–. Inthe ephrinB3 compound mice (Reln1/2; Efnb32/2) Brn11 cellsaberrantly accumulate in the lower layers of the cortex and donot migrate to the upper layers, resembling the Reeler(Reln2/2) phenotype. Original pictures and additional examplesare shown in the Supplementary Information of thisCorrigendum, where arrows indicate the distribution of Brn11cells. We have also included results from a new, reproducedexperiment recently performed with an additional cohort ofanimals that shows exactly the same results.Figure 1c depicts a Brn1 staining of the E17.5 mouse cortex forfive different genotypes. In the process of figure assemblycropped images from original pictures were inadvertentlymislabelled and used incorrectly. We provide below acorrected Fig. 1c with a new image for Reln1/1; Efnb3–/–. Inthe ephrinB3 compound mice (Reln1/2; Efnb32/2) Brn11 cellsaberrantly accumulate in the lower layers of the cortex and donot migrate to the upper layers, resembling the Reeler(Reln2/2) phenotype. Original pictures and additional examplesare shown in the Supplementary Information of thisCorrigendum, where arrows indicate the distribution of Brn11cells. We have also included results from a new, reproducedexperiment recently performed with an additional cohort ofanimals that shows exactly the same results.
  27. 27. Trend: Mega-CorrectionsIn this Letter we made errors in representative image choice,including mislabelling of images or choosing an image fromthe inappropriate genotype. In all cases, choice of imageswas completely independent of the data analysis and so noneof the conclusions in our original Letter are affected. Weapologise for any confusion these errors may have caused.Figure 1a depicts a Tbr1 staining of the adult mouse cortexfor four different genotypes. In the process of choosingrepresentative pictures that reflect the results of ouranalysis shown in Fig. 1b, cropped images from originalpictures were inadvertently mislabelled and usedincorrectly. We provide below a corrected version of Fig. 1awith new representative images for the following genotypes:WT and Reln1/1;Efnb32/2. A new high-magnification picturefor WT is also shown in the two rightmost panels. Originalimages for every genotype and additional examples areshown in the Supplementary Information of thisCorrigendum.Figure 1a depicts a Tbr1 staining of the adult mouse cortexfor four different genotypes. In the process of choosingrepresentative pictures that reflect the results of ouranalysis shown in Fig. 1b, cropped images from originalpictures were inadvertently mislabelled and usedincorrectly. We provide below a corrected version of Fig. 1awith new representative images for the following genotypes:WT and Reln1/1;Efnb32/2. A new high-magnification picturefor WT is also shown in the two rightmost panels. Originalimages for every genotype and additional examples areshown in the Supplementary Information of thisCorrigendum.Figure 1c depicts a Brn1 staining of the E17.5 mouse cortex forfive different genotypes. In the process of figure assemblycropped images from original pictures were inadvertentlymislabelled and used incorrectly. We provide below acorrected Fig. 1c with a new image for Reln1/1; Efnb3–/–. Inthe ephrinB3 compound mice (Reln1/2; Efnb32/2) Brn11 cellsaberrantly accumulate in the lower layers of the cortex and donot migrate to the upper layers, resembling the Reeler(Reln2/2) phenotype. Original pictures and additional examplesare shown in the Supplementary Information of thisCorrigendum, where arrows indicate the distribution of Brn11cells. We have also included results from a new, reproducedexperiment recently performed with an additional cohort ofanimals that shows exactly the same results.Figure 1c depicts a Brn1 staining of the E17.5 mouse cortex forfive different genotypes. In the process of figure assemblycropped images from original pictures were inadvertentlymislabelled and used incorrectly. We provide below acorrected Fig. 1c with a new image for Reln1/1; Efnb3–/–. Inthe ephrinB3 compound mice (Reln1/2; Efnb32/2) Brn11 cellsaberrantly accumulate in the lower layers of the cortex and donot migrate to the upper layers, resembling the Reeler(Reln2/2) phenotype. Original pictures and additional examplesare shown in the Supplementary Information of thisCorrigendum, where arrows indicate the distribution of Brn11cells. We have also included results from a new, reproducedexperiment recently performed with an additional cohort ofanimals that shows exactly the same results.In Fig. 1d, the second panel, labelled ‘Reln1/1;Efnb3–/–’should instead be labelled ‘Reln1/2’. In the Methodssummary section ‘Stimulation of neurons’, ‘‘Corticalneurons from E14.5 were grown….’’ should instead read‘‘Cortical neurons from E15.5 were grown….’’.(There were mistakes in the supplementary onlinematerial, too.)In Fig. 1d, the second panel, labelled ‘Reln1/1;Efnb3–/–’should instead be labelled ‘Reln1/2’. In the Methodssummary section ‘Stimulation of neurons’, ‘‘Corticalneurons from E14.5 were grown….’’ should instead read‘‘Cortical neurons from E15.5 were grown….’’.(There were mistakes in the supplementary onlinematerial, too.)
  28. 28. Anonymous Whistleblowers Step Uphttp://www.labtimes.org
  29. 29. Blogs Get Aggressivehttp://abnormalscienceblog.wordpress.com/
  30. 30. Blogs Get Aggressive
  31. 31. Blogs Get Aggressivehttp://md-anderson-cc.blogspot.com
  32. 32. Blogs Get Aggressivehttp://www.science-fraud.org/
  33. 33. Journals Are Listening
  34. 34. Journals Are Listening
  35. 35. Journals Are Listening
  36. 36. Journals Are Listening
  37. 37. Contact Infoivan-oransky@erols.comhttp://retractionwatch.com@ivanoranskyThanks to Nancy Lapid, Reuters Health

×