“Research exceptionalism” in the COVID-19 pandemic: an analysis of scientific retractions in Scopus

References

• Abramo, G., & D’Angelo, C. A. (2021). A bibliometric methodology to unveil territorial inequities in the scientific wealth to combat COVID-19. Scientometrics, 126(8), 6601–6624. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-021-04017-7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alexander, P. E., Debono, V. B., Mammen, M. J., Iorio, A., Aryal, K., Deng, D., Brocard, E., & Alhazzani, W. (2020). COVID-19 coronavirus research has overall low methodological quality thus far: Case in point for chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 123, 120–126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2020.04.016
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Almeida de, R. M. V. R., Rocha, K. A., Catelani, F., Fontes-Pereira, A. J., & Vasconcelos, S. M. R. (2016). Plagiarism allegations account for most retractions in major Latin American/Caribbean databases. Science and Engineering Ethics, 22(5), 1447–1456. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-015-9714-5
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anderson, C., Nugent, K., & Peterson, C. (2021). Academic journal retractions and the COVID-19 Pandemic. Journal of Primary Care & Community Health, 12 (1) , 21501327211015592. https://doi.org/10.1177/21501327211015592
   Google Scholar
• Aria, M. & Cuccurullo, C. (2017). bibliometrix: An R-tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis. Journal of Informetrics, 11(4), 959–975. Elsevier.
   Google Scholar
• Aviv-Reuven, S., & Rosenfeld, A. (2021). Publication patterns’ changes due to the COVID-19 pandemic: A longitudinal and short-term scientometric analysis. Scientometrics, 126(8), 6761–6784. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-021-04059-x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barroga, E., & Matanguihan, G. J. (2020). Fundamental shifts in research, ethics and peer review in the era of the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Korean Medical Science, 35(45), e395. https://doi.org/10.3346/jkms.2020.35.e395
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bell, K., & Green, J. (2020). Premature evaluation? Some cautionary thoughts on global pandemics and scholarly publishing. Critical Public Health, 30(4), 379–383. https://doi.org/10.1080/09581596.2020.1769406
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berlinck, R. G. (2011). The academic plagiarism and its punishments-a review. Brazilian Journal of Pharmacognosy, 21(3), 365–372. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0102-695X2011005000099
   Google Scholar
• Bertrand, B., Bertrand, B., Bertrand, B., & Bertrand, P. M. (2020). Éthique et biomedical recherche during the épidemie du COVID-19: Ne confondons pas vitesse et précipitation! Annales Pharmaceutiques Françaises, 78(5), 365–367. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pharma.2020.05.004
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Boseley, S., & Davey, M. (2020). COVID-19 Lancet retracts paper that halted hydroxychloroquine trials. The Guardian. Retrieved on August 25, 2021, from https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jun/04/covid-19-lancet-retracts-paper-that-halted-hydroxychloroquine-trials
   Google Scholar
• Brainard, J. (2018). Rethinking retractions. Science. Retrieved August 25, 2021, from https://science.sciencemag.org/content/362/6413/390.summary
   Google Scholar
• Browman, H. (2019). Retraction Guidelines 2019 Update. COPE European Seminar 2019, https://publicationethics.org/files/Retraction%20Guidelines%20presentation_Browman.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Calvillo, D. P., Ross, B. J., Garcia, R. J., Smelter, T. J., & Rutchick, A. M. (2020). Political ideology predicts perceptions of the threat of COVID-19 (and susceptibility to fake news about it). Social Psychological and Personality Science, 11(8), 1119–1128. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550620940539
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Campbell, M. (2020). Technology Networks. LabX Media Group. Retrieved on August 25, 2021, from https://www.technologynetworks.com/tn/articles/is-research-quality-being-compromised-during-the-covid-19-pandemic-333849
   Google Scholar
• Chong, M., & Park, H. W. (2021). COVID-19 in the Twitterverse, from epidemic to pandemic: Information-sharing behavior and Twitter as an information carrier. Scientometrics, 126(8), 6479–6503. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-021-04054-2
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cokol, M., Iossifov, I., Rodriguez-Esteban, R., & Rzhetsky, A. (2007). How many scientific papers should be retracted? EMBO Reports, 8(5), 422–423. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.embor.7400970
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Committee on Publication Ethics. (2019). COPE Retraction guidelines – English. Retrieved on August 25, 2021, from https://publicationethics.org/files/retraction-guidelines-cope.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Corona Central. (2021). Corona Central Dashboard. Retrieved on August 9, 2021, from https://coronacentral.ai/
   Google Scholar
• Dal-Ré, R., & Ayuso, C. (2019). Reasons for and time to retraction of genetics articles published between 1970 and 2018. Journal of Medical Genetics, 56(11), 734–740. https://doi.org/10.1136/jmedgenet-2019-106137
   PubMed Web of Science ®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, 103(3), 136. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3411255/.
   Google Scholar
• Di Girolamo, N., & Reynders, R. M. (2020). Characteristics of scientific articles on COVID-19 published during the initial 3 months of the pandemic. Scientometrics, 125(1), 795–812. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03632-0
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dobránszki, J., & Teixeira da Silva, J. A. (2019). Corrective factors for author-and journal-based metrics impacted by citations to accommodate for retractions. Scientometrics, 121(1), 387–398. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-019-03190-0
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Elango, B. (2021). Retracted articles in the biomedical literature from Indian authors. Scientometrics, 126(5), 3965–3981. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-021-03895-1
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Elliott, T. L., Marquis, L. M., & Neal, C. S. (2013). Business ethics perspectives: Faculty plagiarism and fraud. Journal of Business Ethics, 112(1), 91–99. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-012-1234-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fanelli, D., & Tregenza, T. (2009). How many scientists fabricate and fake research? A systematic review and meta-analysis of survey data. PLoS ONE, 4(5), e5738. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0005738
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fanelli, D. (2009). How many scientists fabricate and fake research? a systematic review and meta-analysis of survey data. PLoS ONE, 4(5), e5738.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fanelli, D., Costas, R., Larivière, V., & Wray, K. B. (2015). Misconduct policies, academic culture and career stage, not gender or pressures to publish, affect scientific integrity. PloS ONE, 10(6), e0127556. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0127556
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fanelli, D., Wong, J., & Moher, D. (2021). What difference might retractions make? An estimate of the potential epistemic cost of retractions on meta-analyses. Accountability in Research, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2021.1947810
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fang, F. C., Casadevall, A., & Morrison, R. P. (2011). Retracted science and the retraction index. American Society for Microbiology - Infection and Immunity, 79(10), 3855–3859. https://doi.org/10.1128/IAI.05661-11
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fang, F. C., Steen, R. G., & Casadevall, A. (2012). Misconduct accounts for the majority of retracted scientific publications. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 109(42), 17028–17033. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1212247109
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fraser, N., Brierley, L., Dey, G., Polka, J. K., Páfy, M., & Coates, J. A. (2020). Preprinting a pandemic: The role of preprints in the COVID-19 pandemic. PLoS Biol, 19 (4) e3000959 . https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.05.22.111294
   Google Scholar
• Galhardi, C. P., Freire, N. P., Minayo, M. C. D. S., & Fagundes, M. C. M. (2020). Fact or fake? An analysis of disinformation regarding the Covid-19 pandemic in Brazil. Ciência & Saúde Coletiva, 25(suppl 2), 4201–4210. https://doi.org/10.1590/1413-812320202510.2.28922020
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gasparyan, A. Y., Ayvazyan, L., Akazhanov, N. A., & Kitas, G. D. (2014). Self-correction in biomedical publications and the scientific impact. Croatian Medical Journal, 55(1), 61. https://doi.org/10.3325/cmj.2014.55.61
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gianola, S., Jesus, T. S., Bargeri, S., Castellini, G., & Mathes, T. (2020). Characteristics of academic publications, preprints, and registered clinical trials on the COVID-19 pandemic. PloS ONE, 10(6), e0240123. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0240123
   Google Scholar
• Global Preparedness Monitoring Board. (2021). Annual Report. Retrieved on July 26, 2021, from https://www.gpmb.org/annual-reports/annual-report-2021
   Google Scholar
• Grieneisen, M. L., Zhang, M., & von Elm, E. (2012). A comprehensive survey of retracted articles from the scholarly literature. PloS ONE, 7(10), e44118. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0044118
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hirano, T., & Murakami, M. (2020). COVID-19: A new virus, but a familiar receptor and cytokine release syndrome. Immunity, 52(5), 731–733. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.immuni.2020.04.003
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Horbach, S. P. (2020). Pandemic publishing: Medical journals strongly speed up their publication process for COVID-19. Quantitative Science Studies, 1(3), 1056–1067. https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00076
   Google Scholar
• Ioannidis, J. P. (2020). Coronavirus disease 2019: The harms of exaggerated information and non-evidence-based measures. European Journal of Clinical Investigation, 50(4), 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1111/eci.13222
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kambhampati, S. B., Vaishya, R., & Vaish, A. (2020). Unprecedented appears in publications related to COVID-19 in the first three months of pandemic: The bibliometric analytic report. Journal of Clinical Orthopedics and Trauma, 11(Suppl 3), S304. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcot.2020.04.030
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kim, A. H., Sparks, J. A., Liew, J. W., Putman, M. S., Berenbaum, F., Duarte-García, A., Graef, E. K., Sattui, P., E, S., Sirotich, E., Ugarte-Gil, M., Webb, K., & Grainger, R. (2020). A rush to judgment? Rapid reporting and dissemination of results and its consequences regarding the use of hydroxychloroquine for COVID-19. Annals of Internal Medicine, 172(12), 819–821. https://doi.org/10.7326/M20-1223
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kupferschmidt, K. (2020). A completely new culture of doing research. Coronavirus outbreak changes how scientists communicate. Science. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abb4761
   Google Scholar
• Lei, L., & Zhang, Y. (2018). Lack of improvement in scientific integrity: An analysis of WoS retractions by Chinese researchers (1997–2016). Science and Engineering Ethics, 24(5), 1409–1420. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-017-9962-7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li, H., Liu, Z., & Ge, J. (2020). Scientific research progress of COVID-19/SARS-CoV-2 in the first five months. Journal of Cellular and Molecular Medicine, 24(12), 6558–6570. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcmm.15364
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lievore, C., Rubbo, P., Dos Santos, C. B., Picinin, C. T., & Pilatti, L. A. (2021). Research ethics: A profile of retractions from world class universities. Scientometrics 126(8) , 6871–6889. https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/2Fs11192-021-03987-y
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lins, L. (2014). SciELO in Perspective. SciELO.org. Retrieved on August 25, 2021, from http://blog.scielo.org/blog/2014/09/30/retratacao-cientifica-e-pseudociencia/
   Google Scholar
• London, A. J., & Kimmelman, J. (2020). Against pandemic research exceptionalism. Science, 368(6490), 476–477. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abc1731
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lou, J., Tian, S. J., Niu, S. M., Kang, X. Q., Lian, H. X., Zhang, L. X., & Zhang, J. J. (2020). Coronavirus disease 2019: A bibliometric analysis and review. European Review for Medical and Pharmacological Sciences, 24(6), 3411–3421. https://doi.org/10.26355/eurrev_202003_20712
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lu, S. F., Jin, G. Z., Uzzi, B., & Jones, B. (2013). The retraction penalty: Evidence from the web of science. Scientific Reports, 3(1), 5. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep03146
   Google Scholar
• Marcus, A., & Oransky, I. (2020). The science of this pandemic is moving at dangerous speeds. Wired. (March). Retrieved on August 10, 2021, from https://www.wired.com/story/the-science-of-this-pandemic-is-moving-at-dangerous-speeds/
   Google Scholar
• Marques, F. (2021). The turmoil caused by a miscalculation. Revista Pesquisa FAPESP, 306. 8–10. Retrieved on August 31, 2021, from. https://revistapesquisa.fapesp.br/o-tumulto-causado-por-um-calculo-equivocado/
   Google Scholar
• Meagher, K. M., Cummins, N. W., Bharucha, A. E., Badley, A. D., Chlan, L. L., & Wright, R. S. (2020). COVID-19 ethics and research. Mayo Clinic Proceedings, 95(6), 1119–1123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mayocp.2020.04.019
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mongeon, P., & Larivière, V. (2016). Costly collaborations: The impact of scientific fraud on co‐authors’ careers. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 67(3), 535–542. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23421
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mott, A., Fairhurst, C., & Torgerson, D. (2019). Assessing the impact of retraction on the citation of randomized controlled trial reports: An interrupted time-series analysis. Journal of Health Services Research & Policy, 24(1), 44–51. https://doi.org/10.1177/1355819618797965
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nair, S., Yean, C., Yoo, J., Leff, J., Delphin, E., & Adams, D. C. (2020). Reasons for article retraction in anesthesiology: A comprehensive analysis. Canadian Journal of Anesthesia/Journal Canadien D’anesthesie, 67(1), 57–63. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12630-019-01508-3
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Odone, A., Salvati, S., Bellini, L., Bucci, D., Capraro, M., Gaetti, G., Amerio, A., & Signorelli, C. (2020). The runaway science: A bibliometric analysis of the COVID-19 scientific literature. Biomed Minutes, 91 (9–S) , 34–39.
   Google Scholar
• Orlik, T., Rush, J., Cousin, M., & Hong, J. (2020). Coronavirus could cost the global economy $2.7 trillion. Here’s how. Bloomberg. Retrieved on August 10, 2021, from https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2020-coronavirus-pandemic-global-economic-risk
   Google Scholar
• Piller, C., & Servick, K. (2020). Two elite medical journals retract coronavirus papers over data integrity questions. Science, 4(10.1126). Retrieved on August 16, 2021, from. https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/06/two-elite-medical-journals-retract-coronavirus-papers-over-data-integrity-questions
   Google Scholar
• Piller, C. (2021). Disgraced COVID-19 studies are still routinely cited. Science, 371(6527), 331–332. Retrieved on August 16, 2021, from. https://www.science.org/doi/full/10.1126/science.371.6527.331
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pradhan, P., Pandey, A. K., Mishra, A., Gupta, P., Tripathi, P. K., Menon, M. B., Gomes, J., Vivekanandan, P., & Kundu, B. (2020). Uncanny similarity of unique inserts in the 2019-nCoV spike protein to HIV-1 gp120 and Gag. BioRxiv. Retrieved on August 25, 2021, from ( retracted). https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.01.30.927871v2
   Google Scholar
• Redman, B. K., Yarandi, H. N., & Merz, J. F. (2008). Empirical developments in retraction. Journal of Medical Ethics, 34(11), 807–809. https://doi.org/10.1136/jme.2007.023069
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Resnik, D. B., & Dinse, G. E. (2013). Scientific retractions and corrections related to misconduct findings. Journal of Medical Ethics, 39(1), 46–50. https://doi.org/10.1136/medethics-2012-100766
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Resnik, D. B., Wager, E., & Kissling, G. E. (2015). Retraction policies of top scientific journals ranked by impact factor. Journal of the Medical Library Association, 103(3), 136. https://doi.org/10.3163/1536-5050.103.3.006
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reyes, M. (2020). Research in the Time of COVID-19: Challenges of research ethics committees. Journal of the ASEAN Federation of Endocrine Societies, 35(1), 29. https://doi.org/10.15605/jafes.035.01.07
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Rubbo, P., Helmann, C. L., Bilynkievycz Dos Santos, C., & Pilatti, L. A. (2019a). Retractions in the engineering field: A study on the web of science database. Ethics & Behavior, 29(2), 141–155. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508422.2017.1390667
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rubbo, P., Pilatti, L. A., & Picinin, C. T. (2019b). Citation of retracted articles in engineering: A study of the web of science database. Ethics & Behavior, 29(8), 661–679. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508422.2018.1559064
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sox, H. C., & Rennie, D. (2006). Research misconduct, retraction, and cleansing the medical literature: Lessons from the Poehlman case. Annals of Internal Medicine, 8(8), 609–613. https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-144-8-200604180-00123
   Google Scholar
• Steen, R. G., Casadevall, A., Fang, F. C., & Derrick, G. E. (2013). Why has the number of scientific retractions increased? PloS one, 8(7), e68397. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0068397
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tang, L., Hu, G., Sui, Y., Yang, Y., & Cao, C. (2020). Retraction: The “Other Face” of research collaboration? Science and Engineering Ethics, 26(3), 1681–1708. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-020-00209-1
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Teixeira da Silva, J. A., & Dobránszki, J. (2015). Problems with traditional science publishing and finding a wider niche for post-publication peer review. Accountability in Research, 22(1), 22–40. https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2014.899909
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Teixeira da Silva, J. A., & Bornemann-Cimenti, H. (2017). Why do some retracted papers continue to be cited? Scientometrics, 110(1), 365–370. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-2178-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Teixeira da Silva, J. A. (2020). An alert to COVID-19 literature in predatory publishing venues. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 46(5), 102187. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2020.102187
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Teixeira da Silva, J. A., Tsigaris, P., & Erfanmanesh, M. (2021). Publishing volumes in major databases related to Covid-19. Scientometrics, 126(1), 831–842. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03675-3
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tusino, S., & Furfaro, M. (2021). Rethinking the role of research ethics committees in the light of regulation (EU) No 536/2014 on clinical trials and the COVID-19 pandemic. British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology 88 (1), 40–46. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1111/bcp.14871
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Leeuwen, T. N., & Luwel, M. (2014). An in-depth analysis of papers retracted in the Web of Science. In Editors Context Counts: Pathways to Master Big and Little Data. Proceedings of the science and technology indicators conference (pp. 337–344). Publisher.
   Google Scholar
• Van Leeuwen, T. (2019). Analysis of retracted papers: Initiators and reasons for retraction. Center for Science and Technology Studies, Leiden University COPE Seminar, Leiden University, Netherlands. Retrieved on August 25, 2021, from https://publicationethics.org/files/Analysis%20of%20retracted%20papers_Thed%20van%20Leeuwen_European%20Seminar%202019.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Van Noorden, R. (2011). Science publishing: The trouble with retractions. Nature, 478(7367), 26–28. https://doi.org/10.1038/478026a
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vuong, Q.-H. (2018). The (ir)rational consideration of the cost of science in transition economies. Nature Human Behaviour, 2(1), 5. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-017-0281-4
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vuong, Q. H., La, V. P., Hô, M. T., Vuong, T. T., & Ho, M. T. (2020). Characteristics of retracted articles based on retraction data from online sources through February 2019. Science Editing, 7(1), 34–44. https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.187
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wager, E., Barbour, V., Yentis, S., & Kleinert, S. (2010). Retractions: Guidance from the Committee On Publication Ethics (COPE). International Journal of Polymer Analysis and Characterization, 15(1), 2–6. https://doi.org/10.1080/10236660903474522
   Google Scholar
• Wager, E., & Williams, P. (2011). Why and how do journals retract articles? An analysis of medline retractions 1988-2008. Journal of Medical Ethics, 37(9), 567–570. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/jme.2010.040964
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walach, H., Klement, R. J., & Aukema, W. (2021). The safety of covid-19 vaccinations—we should rethink the policy. Vaccines, Vol. 9(7), p. 693. Retracted. https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines9070693
   Google Scholar
• Web of Science Group (2022). Journal Citation Reports: edição de 2020.
   Google Scholar
• Weber, B. (2020 April 21). Scientists cut peer-review corners under pressure of COVID-19 pandemic. CBC, Retrieved on August 10, 2021, from https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/scientists-covid-pandemic-research-misinformation-1.5539997
   Google Scholar
• Yeo-Teh, N. S. L., & Tang, B. L. (2021). An alarming retraction rate for scientific publications on coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Accountability in Research, 28(1), 47–53. https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2020.1782203
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar