Retractions in Scopus: An Engineering Journal Articles Investigation

References

• Bakker, C., and A. Riegelman. 2018. Retracted publications in mental health literature: Discovery across bibliographic platforms. Journal of Librarianship and Scholarly Communication 6 (1): eP2199. doi:10.7710/2162-3309.2199.
   Google Scholar
• Bar-Ilan, J., and G. Halevi. 2017. Post retraction citations in context: A case study. Scientometrics 113 (1):547–65. doi:10.1007/s11192-017-2242-0.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bauchner, H., P. B. Fontanarosa, A. Flanagin, and J. Thornton. 2018. Scientific misconduct and medical journals. JAMA 320 (19):1985–87. doi:10.1001/jama.2018.14350.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bornemann-Cimenti, H., I. S. Szilagyi, and A. Sandner-Kiesling. 2016. Perpetuation of retracted publications using the example of the Scott S. Reuben case: Incidences, reasons and possible improvements. Science and Engineering Ethics 22 (4):1063–72. doi:10.1007/s11948-015-9680-y.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Budd, J. M., Z. Coble, and A. Abritis. 2016. An investigation of retracted articles in the biomedical literature. Proceedings of the Association for Information Science and Technology 53 (1):1–9. doi:10.1002/pra2.2016.14505301055.
   Google Scholar
• Carlisle, J. B. 2017. Data fabrication and other reasons for non-random sampling in 5087 randomised, controlled trials in anaesthetic and general medical journals. Anaesthesia 72 (8):944–52. doi:10.1111/anae.13938.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chambers, L., C. Michener, and T. Falcone. 2019. Plagiarism and data falsification are the most common reasons for retracted publications in obstetrics and gynaecology. BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology 126 (9):1134–40. doi:10.1111/1471-0528.15689.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Committee on Publication Ethics. n.d. Retraction guidelines. COPE: Committee on Publication Ethics. https://publicationethics.org/retraction-guidelines
   Google Scholar
• Davis, P. M. 2012. The persistence of error: A study of retracted articles on the Internet and in personal libraries. Journal of the Medical Library Association 100 (3):184–89. doi:10.3163/1536-5050.100.3.008.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deculllier, E., and H. Maisonneuve. 2018. Correcting the literature: Improvement trends seen in contents of retraction notices. BMC Research Notes 11 (1):1–3. doi:10.1186/s13104-018-3576-2.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Drimer-Batca, D., J. M. Iaccarino, and A. Fine. 2019. Status of retraction notices for biomedical publications associated with research misconduct. Research Ethics 15 (2):1–5. doi:10.1177/1747016118820496.
   Google Scholar
• El-Menyar, A., A. Mekkodathil, M. Asim, R. Consunji, S. Rizoli, A. Abdel-Aziz Bahey, and H. Al-Thani. 2021. Publications and retracted articles of COVID-19 pharmacotherapy-related research: A systematic review. Science Progress 104 (2):00368504211016936. doi:10.1177/00368504211016936.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Fanelli, D. 2009. How many scientists fabricate and falsify research? A systematic review and meta-analysis of survey data. PLOS ONE 4 (5):e5738. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0005738.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fang, F. C., R. G. Steen, and A. Casadevall. 2012. Misconduct accounts for the majority of retracted scientific publications. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 109 (42):17028–33. doi:10.1073/pnas.1212247109.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Foo, J. Y. A. 2011. A retrospective analysis of the trend of retracted publications in the field of biomedical and life sciences. Science and Engineering Ethics 17 (3):459–68. doi:10.1007/s11948-010-9212-8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Furman, J. L., K. Jensen, and F. Murray. 2012. Governing knowledge in the scientific community: Exploring the role of retractions in biomedicine. Research Policy 41 (2):276–90. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2011.11.001.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gasparyan, A. Y., L. Ayvazyan, N. A. Akazhanov, and G. D. Kitas. 2014. Self-correction in biomedical publications and the scientific impact. Croatian Medical Journal 55 (1):61–72. doi:10.3325/cmj.2014.55.61.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gogoi, M., and A. Chatterjee. 2016. Vaccines and Autism: A Misconception that persists. South Dakota Medicine: The Journal of the South Dakota State Medical Association 69 (10):465–67.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Grieneisen, M. L., and M. Zhang. 2012. A comprehensive survey of retracted articles from the scholarly literature. PLoS ONE 7 (10):e44118. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0044118.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jang, S. M., B. W. Mckeever, R. Mckeever, and J. K. Kim. 2019. From social media to mainstream news: The information flow of the vaccine-autism controversy in the US, Canada, and the UK. Health Communication 34 (1):110–17. doi:10.1080/10410236.2017.1384433.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lei, L., and Y. Zhang. 2018. Lack of improvement in scientific integrity: An analysis of WoS retractions by Chinese researchers (1997-2016). Science and Engineering Ethics 24 (5):1409–20. doi:10.1007/s11948-017-9962-7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lu, S. F., G. Z. Jin, B. Uzzi, and B. Jones. 2013. The retraction penalty: Evidence from the web of science. Scientific Reports 3 (1):1–5. doi:10.1038/srep03146.
   Google Scholar
• Madlock-Brown, C. R., and D. Eichmann. 2015. The (lack of) impact of retraction on citation networks. Science and Engineering Ethics 21 (1):127–37. doi:10.1007/s11948-014-9532-1.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. Fostering Integrity in Research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi:10.17226/21896.
   Google Scholar
• The Office of Research Integrity. n.d. Definition of Research Misconduct. https://ori.hhs.gov/definition-research-misconduct
   Google Scholar
• Rubbo, P., L. A. Pilatti, and C. T. Picinin. 2019. Citation of retracted articles in engineering: A study of the web of science database. Ethics & Behavior 29 (8):661–79. doi:10.1080/10508422.2018.1559064.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rubbo, P., C. L. Helmann, C. B. Dos Santos, and L. A. Pilatti. 2019. Retractions in the engineering field: A study on the web of science database. Ethics & Behavior 29 (2):141–55. doi:10.1080/10508422.2017.1390667.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schneider, J., N. D. Woods, R. Proescholdt, and Y. Fu, T.R. Team. 2021. Recommendations from the reducing the inadvertent spread of retracted science: Shaping a research and implementation agenda project. F1000Research 10. doi:10.31222/osf.io/ms579.
   Google Scholar
• Shuai, X., J. Rollins, I. Moulinier, T. Custis, M. Edmunds, and F. Schilder. 2017. A multidimensional investigation of the effects of publication retraction on scholarly impact. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology 68 (9):2225–36. doi:10.1002/asi.23826.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Solomon, D., and C. Heckman. 2021. Engineering literature retractions: Applications to scholarly communications training. In 2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference, Long Beach, CA. https://peer.asee.org/37068
   Google Scholar
• Sotudeh, H., N. Barahmand, Z. Yousefi, and M. Yaghtin. 2020. How do academia and society react to erroneous or deceitful claims? The case of retracted articles’ recognition. Journal of Information Science 48 (2):182–98. doi:10.1177/0165551520945853.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sox, H. C., and D. Rennie. 2006. Research misconduct, retraction, and cleansing the medical literature: Lessons from the Poehlman case. Annals of Internal Medicine 144 (8):609–13. doi:10.7326/0003-4819-144-8-200604180-00123.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Steen, R. G., A. Casadevall, and F. C. Fang. 2013. Why has the number of scientific retractions increased? PLoS One 8 (7):e68397. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0068397.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Teixeira da Silva, J., and J. Dobránszki. 2017. Notices and policies for retractions, expressions of concern, errata and corrigenda: Their importance, content, and context. Science & Engineering Ethics 23 (2):521–54. doi:10.1007/s11948-016-9769-y.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Teixeira da Silva, J. A. 2020. Reasons for citing retracted literature are not straightforward, and solutions are complex. Journal of Applied Physiology 129 (1):3. doi:10.1152/japplphysiol.00258.2020.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Teixeira da Silva, J. A., and Q.-H. Vuong. 2021. Fortification of retraction notices to improve their transparency and usefulness. Learned Publishing 35 (2):292–99. doi:10.1002/leap.1409.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tentolouris, A., I. Ntanasis-Stathopoulos, P. K. Vlachakis, D. I. Tsilimigras, M. Gavriatopoulou, and M. A. Dimopoulos. 2021. COVID-19: Time to flatten the infodemic curve. Clinical and Experimental Medicine 21 (2):161–65. doi:10.1007/s10238-020-00680-x.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wager, E., Barbour, V., Yentis, S., and Kleinert, S. Retractions: guidance from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Obesity Reviews 11 (1): 64–6 doi:10.1111/j.1467-789X.2009.00702.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar