A Survey of Iranian Retracted Publications Indexed in PubMed
Background: Retraction is a mechanism for correcting the literature and a warning for readers in relation to publications that contain serious flaws or erroneous data. As a result of growth and development of Iranian publications in the last two decades, that brings unethical behavior of researchers led to retraction of their publications. We aimed to investigate Iranian retracted publications indexed in PubMed database.
Methods: All Iranian retracted publications published in PubMed up to Dec 2017 have been retrieved. Bibliographic information of retracted publications, retraction notice, time lag between article publication date and the date of retraction notice, reasons of retraction, Issuer of retraction and acknowledge information of retracted publication were recorded. Additionally, citation data of retracted publications before 2013 were analyzed.
Results: Overall, 164 Iranian retracted publications were identified. Meantime lag was 20.8 months. "Islamic Azad University" and "Tehran University of Medical Sciences (TUMS)" were two affiliations that have received highest number of retracted publications. The most issuer of retraction publications was editor-in-chief and the most mentioned reasons for retractions were authorship issues, plagiarism, and redundant publication. Thirty-three (20.12%) publications have received funds from various agencies. Citation study of retracted publications indicates that these publications have received 789 citations (Citation per publication=11.6).
Conclusion: Although Iranian retracted publications represent small portion of all Iranian publications, but the number of retracted publications has increased. More than half of retracted publications have had authorship issues and plagiarism that requires more attention to research ethics authorities.
2. Kleinert S (2009). COPE’s retraction guidelines. Lancet, 374 (9705): 1876–7.
3. Budd JM, Sievert M, Schultz TR (1998). Phe-nomena of retraction: reasons for retraction and citations to the publications. JAMA, 280 (3): 296-7.
4. Decullier E, Huot L, Maisonneuve H (2014). What time-lag for a retraction search on PubMed? BMC Res Notes, 7: 395.
5. Decullier E, Huot L, Samson G, et al (2013). Visibility of retractions: a cross-sectional one-year study. BMC Res Notes, 6: 238.
6. Chen C, Hu Z, Milbank J, Schultz T (2013). A visual analytic study of retracted articles in scientific literature. J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol, 64 (2): 234–53.
7. Bozzo A, Bali K, Evaniew N, Ghert M (2017). Retractions in cancer research: a systematic survey. Res Integr Peer Rev, 2: 5.
8. Stern AM, Casadevall A, Steen RG, et al (2014). Financial costs and personal consequences of research misconduct resulting in retracted publications. eLife, 3: e02956.
9. Steen RG (2011). Retractions in the medical liter-ature: how many patients are put at risk by flawed research? J Med Ethics, 37 (11): 688–92.
10. Samp JC, Schumock GT, Pickard AS (2012). Retracted publications in the drug literature. Pharmacotherapy, 32 (7): 586–95.
11. Fang FC, Steen RG, Casadevall A (2012). Mis-conduct accounts for the majority of retract-ed scientific publications. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 109 (42): 17028–33.
12. Nogueira TE, Gonçalves AS, Leles CR, et al (2017). A survey of retracted articles in den-tistry. BMC Res Notes, 10: 253.
13. Rosenkrantz AB (2016). Retracted publications within radiology journals. AJR Am J Roent-genol, 206 (2): 231–5.
14. Balhara YPS, Mishra A (2015). A study explor-ing attributes and nature of the retracted liter-ature on mental disorders. Indian J Med Ethics, 12 (1): 30–7.
15. Budd JM, Coble Z, Abritis A (2016). An investi-gation of retracted articles in the biomedical literature: An Investigation of Retracted Arti-cles in the Biomedical Literature. Proc Assoc Inf Sci Technol, 53 (1) :1–9.
16. Damineni R, Sardiwal K, Waghle S, et al (2015). A comprehensive comparative analysis of ar-ticles retracted in 2012 and 2013 from the scholarly literature. J Int Soc Prev Community Dent, 5 (1): 19-23.
17. Singh HP, Mahendra A, Yadav B, et al (2014). A comprehensive analysis of articles retracted between 2004 and 2013 from biomedical lit-erature – A call for reforms. J Tradit Comple-ment Med, 4 (3): 136–9.
18. Foo JYA (2011). A Retrospective Analysis of the trend of retracted publications in the field of biomedical and life sciences. Sci Eng Ethics, 17 (3): 459–68.
19. Stretton S, Bramich NJ, Keys JR, et al (2012). Publication misconduct and plagiarism retrac-tions: a systematic, retrospective study. Curr Med Res Opin, 28 (10): 1575–83.
20. Grieneisen ML, Zhang M (2012). A compre-hensive survey of retracted articles from the scholarly literature. PLoS One, 7 (10): e44118.
21. Moradi S, Janavi E (2018). A scientometrics study of Iranian retracted papers. Iran J Inf Process Manag, 33 (4): 1823–44.
22. Moradi S, Janavi E, Kazemi H (2018). A com-parative study of scientific misconduct through the world. Natl Stud Librariansh Inf Organ, 28 (4): 75–94.
23. Masoomi R, Amanollahi A (2018). Why Iranian Biomedical Articles Are Retracted? MEDI-CAL EDUCATION AND DEVELOP-MENT, 13 (2): 87–100.
24. Teixeira da Silva JA, Bornemann-Cimenti H (2017). Why do some retracted papers con-tinue to be cited? Scientometrics, 110 (1): 365–70.
25. Pourjahed A, Rabiee M, Tahriri M (2013). An efficient covalent coating on glass slides for preparation of optical oligonucleotide micro-arrays. Iran J Basic Med Sci, 16 (12): 1259–1265.
26. Marcus A, Oransky I (2014). What studies of retractions tell Us. J Microbiol Biol Educ, 15 (2): 151–154.
27. Mansoori P (2018). 50 years of Iranian clinical, biomedical, and public health research: a bib-liometric analysis of the Web of Science Core Collection (1965-2014). J Glob Health, 8 (2): 020701.
28. Moylan EC, Kowalczuk MK (2016). Why articles are retracted: a retrospective cross-sectional study of retraction notices at BioMed Central. BMJ Open, 6 (11): e012047.
29. Budd JM, Coble ZC, Anderson KM (2011). Re-tracted publications in biomedicine: cause for concern. ACRL Conference, Philadelphia, PA. 390-5.
30. Steen RG, Casadevall A, Fang FC (2013). Why has the number of scientific retractions in-creased? PLoS One, 8 (7): e68397.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.