Retraction of publications: a study of biomedical journals retracting publications based on impact factor and journal category.

Clicks: 478
ID: 50877
2019
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Emerging

Ranked #4 of 31 articles by views in gaceta sanitaria

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
To describe the biomedical journal characteristics that are associated with the retraction of papers.A descriptive cross-sectional study was conducted. All papers retracted and indexed in PubMed from January 1 2013 to December 31, 2016 were included. We used nine main categories to classify retractions: aspects related with data, authors issues, plagiarism, unethical research, journal issues, review process, conflict of interest, other, and unknown. These categories were further classified as: misconduct, suspicion of misconduct, or no misconduct.The proportion of retraction was 2.5 per 10,000 publications. Retractions appeared in 611 journals. During the study period, retraction due to misconduct was more frequent among journals with low-impact factor. Within these retracted publications, among low-impact journals the presence of misconduct was higher with a 73% compared to 61% for the high-impact journals (p=0.001). There were differences in the percentage of retractions due to misconduct regarding the journal classification category (p<0.001).Retraction of publications is present in both high- and low-impact factor biomedical journals, but misconduct is more frequent among the papers retracted from lower impact journals. Measures before and after publication should be taken to limit misconduct.
Reference Key
camposvarela2019retractiongaceta Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Campos-Varela, Isabel;Villaverde-Castañeda, Ramón;Ruano-Raviña, Alberto;
Journal gaceta sanitaria
Year 2019
DOI
S0213-9111(19)30152-9
URL
Keywords
fraud peer review plagiarism impact factor factor de impacto fraude mala conducta científica plagiarism detection systems plagio revisión por pares scientific misconduct sistemas de detección de plagio

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.