![]() ![]() They began to assemble a list of retractions. ![]() The attention also helped catalyze an effort by two longtime health journalists-Ivan Oransky and Adam Marcus, who founded the blog Retraction Watch, based in New York City-to get more insight into just how many scientific papers were being withdrawn, and why. Still, the surge in retractions led many observers to call on publishers, editors, and other gatekeepers to make greater efforts to stamp out bad science. And whether suspect papers were becoming more common-or journals were just getting better at recognizing and reporting them-wasn't clear. Sometimes the reason for the withdrawal was honest error, not deliberate fraud. Although statistics were sketchy, retractions appeared to be relatively rare, involving only about two of every 10,000 papers. The alarming news came with some caveats. Science, it seemed, faced a mushrooming crisis. Boldt may have even harmed patients by encouraging the adoption of an unproven surgical treatment. Fraud accounted for some 60% of those retractions one offender, anesthesiologist Joachim Boldt, had racked up almost 90 retractions after investigators concluded he had fabricated data and committed other ethical violations. Nearly a decade ago, headlines highlighted a disturbing trend in science: The number of articles retracted by journals had increased 10-fold during the previous 10 years. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |