[Study of the Chinese drug shi-hu(Dendrobium). I. Investigation of botanical origin and the drug (author's transl)].

W. Sha,J. Y. Luo

Abstract:

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Influence of the conditions of trypsin immobilization onto Spherosil on coupling efficiency

P. Monsan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00515681

1978-03-01

European Journal of Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology

Abstract:
A Comparative Study on Characteristics of Retracted Publications Across Different Open Access Levels

Er-Te Zheng,Hui-Zhen Fu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/jdis-2024-0010

2024-01-01

Journal of Data and Information Science

Abstract:Purpose Recently, global science has shown an increasing open trend, however, the characteristics of research integrity of open access (OA) publications have rarely been studied. The aim of this study is to compare the characteristics of retracted articles across different OA levels and discover whether OA level influences the characteristics of retracted articles. Design/methodology/approach The research conducted an analysis of 6,005 retracted publications between 2001 and 2020 from the Web of Science and Retraction Watch databases. These publications were categorized based on their OA levels, including Gold OA, Green OA, and non-OA. The study explored retraction rates, time lags and reasons within these categories. Findings The findings of this research revealed distinct patterns in retraction rates among different OA levels. Publications with Gold OA demonstrated the highest retraction rate, followed by Green OA and non-OA. A comparison of retraction reasons between Gold OA and non-OA categories indicated similar proportions, while Green OA exhibited a higher proportion due to falsification and manipulation issues, along with a lower occurrence of plagiarism and authorship issues. The retraction time lag was shortest for Gold OA, followed by non-OA, and longest for Green OA. The prolonged retraction time for Green OA could be attributed to an atypical distribution of retraction reasons. Research limitations There is no exploration of a wider range of OA levels, such as Hybrid OA and Bronze OA. Practical implications The outcomes of this study suggest the need for increased attention to research integrity within the OA publications. The occurrences of falsification, manipulation, and ethical concerns within Green OA publications warrant attention from the scientific community. Originality/value This study contributes to the understanding of research integrity in the realm of OA publications, shedding light on retraction patterns and reasons across different OA levels.
[Effect of metoprolol on the expression of GRK2 in lymphocyte of advanced elderly patients with chronic heart failure].

Wen-qian Gao,Chun-guang Han,Yue-xiang Zhao,Qiong Wang,P. Zhu,Ting-shu Yang,Yong-xue Liu

2010-05-01

Abstract:OBJECTIVE To investigate the effect of metoprolol on the expression of G protein-coupled receptor kinases 2 (GRK2) in lymphocyte of advanced elderly patients with chronic heart failure. METHODS 32 elderly patients with chronic heart failure were divided into control group and metoprolol group, 16 each. Conventional therapy was used in the control group, conventional therapy plua metoprolol was used in metoprolol group. The treatment courses were 8 weeks in both groups. RESULTS Left ventricular end-diastolic diameter and left ventricular ejection fraction were not different between the two groups. Lymphocyte GRK2 mRNA level in metoprolol group was lower than that in control group. CONCLUSION Metoprolol can inhibit the expression of GRK2 in lymphocyte of advanced elderly patients with chronic heart failure.
Prevalence, Characteristics, and Trends in Retracted Spine Literature: 2000-2023

Aman Singh,Mina Botros,Paul Guirguis,Ankit Punreddy,Addisu Mesfin,Varun Puvanesarajah

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2024.04.080

Abstract:Background: Retraction of scientific publications is an important check on scientific misconduct and serves to maintain the integrity of the scientific literature. The present study aims to examine the prevalence, trends, and characteristics of retracted spine literature across basic science and clinical spine literature. Methods: Multiple databases were queried for retracted papers relating to spine or spine surgery, between January 2000 and May 2023. Of 112,668 publications initially identified, 125 were ultimately included in the present study following screening by 2 independent reviewers. Journal of origin, reasons for retraction, date of publication, date of retraction, impact factor of journal, countries of research origin, and study design were collected for each included publication. Results: Clinical studies were the most frequent type of retracted publication (n = 70). The most common reason for retraction was fraud (n = 58), followed by plagiarism (n = 22), and peer review process manipulation (n = 16). Impact factors ranged from 0.3 to 11.1 with a median of 3.75. Average months from publication to retraction across all studies was 37.5 months. The higher the journal impact factor, the longer the amount of time between publication and retraction (P = 0.01). China (n = 63) was the country of origin of more than half of all retracted spine publications. Conclusions: The rate of retractions has been increasing over the past 23 years, and clinical studies have been the most frequently retracted publication type. Clinicians treating disorders of the spine should be aware of these trends when relying on the clinical literature to inform their practice.
Analysis of the retraction papers in oncology field from Chinese scholars from 2013 to 2022

Wenyan Yang,Na Sun,Hongwei Song

DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/jcrt.jcrt_1627_23

2024-04-01

Abstract:Objective: To analyze the characteristics of retracted oncology papers from Chinese scholars and the reasons for retraction. Methods: Data on retracted oncology papers from Chinese scholars published from 2013 to 2022 were retrieved from the Retraction Watch database. The retraction number and annual distribution, article types, reasons for retraction, retraction time delay, publishers, and journal characteristics of the retracted papers were analyzed. Results: A total of 2695 oncology papers from Chinese scholars published from 2013 to 2022 had been retracted. The majority of these papers were published from 2017 to 2020. In terms of article type, 2538 of the retracted papers were research articles, accounting for 94.17% of the total number of retracted papers. The main reasons for retraction were data, result, and image problems, duplicate publication, paper mills, author- and third-party-related reasons, plagiarism, false reviews, and method errors. The retraction time delay for the retracted papers ranged from 0 to 3582 days (median, 826 days). The retractions mainly occurred within the first 4 years after publication. A total of 77 publishers were involved in the retracted papers. In terms of journal distribution, 394 journals were involved in the retracted papers, of which 368 (93.40%) were included in the SCI database. There were 243 journals with an impact factor of <5 (66.03%). Conclusion: In the field of oncology, the annual distribution of retracted papers from Chinese scholars exhibited first an increasing and subsequently a decreasing trend, reaching a peak in 2019, indicating an improvement in the status of retraction after 2021. The main type of the retracted papers was research article, and the main reason for retraction was academic misconduct. The retractions were mainly concentrated in several major publishers and periodicals in Europe and the United States. Most of the journals had low-impact factors.
Visibility of retractions: a cross-sectional one-year study

Evelyne Decullier,Laure Huot,Géraldine Samson,Hervé Maisonneuve

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/1756-0500-6-238

2013-06-19

Abstract:Background: Retraction in Medline medical literature experienced a tenfold increase between 1999 and 2009, however retraction remains a rare event since it represents 0.02% of publications. Retractions used to be handled following informal practices until they were formalized in 2009 by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). The objective of our study was to describe the compliance to these guidelines. Methods: All retractions published in 2008 were identified using the Medline publication type "retraction of publication". The notices of retraction and the original articles were retrieved. For each retraction, we identified the reason for retraction, the country of affiliation of the first author, the time to retraction, the impact factor of the journal and the mention of retraction on the original article. Results: Overall, 244 retractions were considered for analysis. Formal retraction notices could not be retrieved for 9. Of the 235 retractions available (96%), the reason was not detailed for 21 articles (9%). The most cited reasons were mistakes (28%), plagiarism (20%), fraud (14%) and overlap (11%). The original paper or its location was found for 233 retractions (95%). Of these, 22% were available with no mention of the retraction. Conclusion: A standard retraction form could be helpful, with a check list of major reason, leaving the editor free to provide the reader with any further information. Original articles should remain available with a clear mention of the retraction.
Review of retracted papers in the field of neurology

Xingbo Wang,Ning Gao,Huan Chen,Weiming Wang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/ene.15960

Abstract:Background and purpose: Despite the growing awareness of academic fraud, its prevalence in the field of neurology has not been fully assessed. This review aims to analyze the characteristics of the retracted papers in the field of neurology and the reasons for the retraction to better understand the trends in this area and to assist to avoid retraction incidents. Methods: A total of 79 papers were included, which pertained to 22 countries and 64 journals. The marking methods for retracting original papers included watermarks (89.04%), retracted signs in the text (5.48%) and no prompt (5.48%). The median M (interquartile range [IQR]) of citations in retractions in neurology was 7 (41). Studies continued to be cited after retraction with an M (IQR) of 3 (16). The journal impact factor was between 0 and 157.335, with an M (IQR) of 5.127 (3.668). 45.21% and 31.51% papers were mainly published in the first and second quartile journals, respectively. The M (IQR) time elapsed between publication and retraction was 32 (44) months. The reasons for retraction included two major categories, academic misconduct (79.75%) and academic unintentional mistakes (20.25%). Results and conclusions: The number of retractions in neurology has been on the rise over the past decade, with fabricated academic misconduct being the main cause of the retractions. Due to the long time lag between publication and retraction, a number of unreliable findings continue to be cited following retraction. In addition to the requisite standards of academic ethics, augmenting research training and fostering interdisciplinary collaboration are crucial in enhancing research integrity.
A Multi-dimensional Investigation of the Effects of Publication Retraction on Scholarly Impact

Xin Shuai,Isabelle Moulinier,Jason Rollins,Tonya Custis,Frank Schilder,Mathilda Edmunds

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1602.09123

2016-03-01

Abstract:Over the past few decades, the rate of publication retractions has increased dramatically in academia. In this study, we investigate retractions from a quantitative perspective, aiming to answer two fundamental questions. One, how do retractions influence the scholarly impact of retracted papers, authors, and institutions? Two, does this influence propagate to the wider academic community through scholarly associations? Specifically, we analyzed a set of retracted articles indexed in Thomson Reuters Web of Science (WoS), and ran multiple experiments to compare changes in scholarly impact against a control set of non-retracted articles, authors, and institutions. We further applied the Granger Causality test to investigate whether different scientific topics are dynamically affected by retracted papers occurring within those topics. Our results show two key findings: first, the scholarly impact of retracted papers and authors significantly decreases after retraction, and the most severe impact decrease correlates to retractions based on proven purposeful scientific misconduct; second, this retraction penalty does not seem to spread through the broader scholarly social graph, but instead has a limited and localized effect. Our findings may provide useful insights for scholars or science committees to evaluate the scholarly value of papers, authors, or institutions related to retractions.

Digital Libraries,Social and Information Networks,Physics and Society
New procedure for direct bioautographic TLC assay as applied to a tincture of Ranunculus bulbosus.

N. Didry,L. Dubreuil,M. Pinkas

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-8741(90)90039-V

IF: 5.195

1990-07-01

Journal of Ethnopharmacology

Abstract:
Collaboration and Its Influence on Retraction Based on Retracted Publications During 1978–2017

Zhang Qin,Abraham Juneman,Fu Hui-Zhen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03636-w

2020-01-01

Abstract:Scientific collaboration has considerably grown in recent years, and has been recognized as a positive factor for research productivity and quality. This study is aimed at exploring the collaboration in retracted publications and the influence on different kinds of scientific misbehaviors based on 4842 retracted publications in Web of Science Core Collection from 1978 to 2017. Search results showed that the proportion of international collaborations in retracted publications has fluctuated at around 20% in the past 17 years, and different collaboration patterns of major countries are revealed. The USA and China contributed to more than half of all retracted publications, while retraction rate of Chinese papers was three times higher compared to papers from the USA. A negative correlation between the proportion of internationally collaborative publications and the retraction rate was found. Countries involved in more international collaborations tend to have lower retraction rates. Also, the occurrences of plagiarism was found to be lower when a paper is contributed by more authors, while falsification or manipulation, errors or unreliable results appeared more frequently under the same condition. Conclusions are made with a focus on the need for more actions to strengthen the scientific norms and integrity within collaborative groups.
Price Index Convergence Among Indian Cities : A Cointegration Approach

A. M. Morshed,Sung K. Ahn

Abstract:We examine the price dynamics in Indian cities using cointegration analysis. We identify and then calculate a common trend for prices in these 25 cities. We obtain the impulse response functions to calculate the rates of convergence to the prices, and find that the half-life of any shock is very small for Indian cities. Although a close to three-month half-life seems too fast, there are some indications in the literature that half-life can be much smaller. We also analyzed how shock can be transmitted from one city to another and found no systematic behavior of price convergence. JEL Classification Code: F15, E31, C23.
Red Cell Sorbitol Levels During Hyper and Hypoglycaemic Clamp Studies in Insulin‐dependent Diabetic Patients

D. Price,P. Grant,C. Airey,M. Stickland,J. Kemp,J. Wales

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-5491.1987.tb00868.x

IF: 3.5

1987-05-06

Diabetic Medicine

Abstract:The red cell sorbitol concentration has been suggested as a measure of polyol pathway activity. Red cell sorbitol levels were higher in 53 patients having insulin‐dependent diabetes mellitus (IDDM) than in 16 control subjects. Six patients having IDDM underwent hyperglycaemic ‘clamp’ studies; the red cell sorbitol level returned to the normal range when the blood glucose was clamped at 5 mmol/l for 1 h and rapidly increased when it was clamped at 15 and 25 mmol/l for a further hour at each level. Seven patients with IDDM were rendered hypoglycaemic; red cell sorbitol levels rapidly fell to a level less than, but not significantly different from normal.
A Systematic Review of Retracted Publications in Clinical Orthopaedic Research

Catherine M. Call,Peter C. Michalakes,Andrew D. Lachance,Thomas Zink,Brian J. McGrory

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2024.05.085

IF: 4.435

2024-06-08

The Journal of Arthroplasty

Abstract:Background Retracted publications are an often-overlooked issue affecting the scientific community; recent data confirms the overall number of retracted publications is rising While this has previously been looked at within orthopaedic surgery, a contemporary understanding of retractions is required due to the rapid expansion in publications. Our study aimed to assess the retracted publications within clinical orthopaedic research to evaluate for characteristics and trends. Methods A systematic review was conducted on December 14, 2023, according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. There were four databases that were queried to identify retracted publications in clinical orthopaedics that assessed operative and non-operative orthopaedic interventions (excluding basic science). Articles were independently screened by two reviewers; those meeting inclusion criteria were evaluated for various characteristics, including reasons for retraction based on Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines. Results There were 233 studies that met inclusion criteria and were retracted between January 1, 1990, and December 14, 2023. Clinical orthopaedics represented 1.18% of all retracted publications identified through PubMed over this period. There were 87 articles that were retracted in 2023, up from 17 in 2022 (a 412% increase). Retracted studies were published in journals with 2022 impact factors up to 9.3, with an average of 3.1 (SD [standard deviation] 1.9). A total of 39.5% of the retracted studies were published in orthopaedic journals, and 60.9% of the retracted articles were published in exclusively open access journals. The mean time from electronic publication to retraction was 2.1 years (SD 2.2). Retracted articles have been cited up to 180 times (mean 8.6; SD 20). Reasons for retraction included misconduct (45.9%), plagiarism (11.6%), redundant publication (11.6%), unethical research (10.3%), error (9.4%), and others (10.7%). Conclusions The prevalence of retractions in the clinical orthopaedic literature is increasing. Clinical research is the basis for clinical practice guidelines, the gold standard for informing medical decision making. Retractions may be one harbinger of lower-quality publications; researchers, institutions, and journals together play important roles in maintaining scientific integrity.

orthopedics
Causes for Retraction in the Biomedical Literature: A Systematic Review of Studies of Retraction Notices

Soo Young Hwang,Dong Keon Yon,Seung Won Lee,Min Seo Kim,Jong Yeob Kim,Lee Smith,Ai Koyanagi,Marco Solmi,Andre F Carvalho,Eunyoung Kim,Jae Il Shin,John P A Ioannidis

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3346/jkms.2023.38.e333

2023-10-23

Abstract:Background: Many studies have evaluated the prevalence of different reasons for retraction in samples of retraction notices. We aimed to perform a systematic review of such empirical studies of retraction causes. Methods: The PubMed/MEDLINE database and the Embase database were searched in June 2023. Eligible studies were those containing sufficient data on the reasons for retraction across samples of examined retracted notices. Results: A 11,181 potentially eligible items were identified, and 43 studies of retractions were included in this systematic review. Studies limited to retraction notices of a specific subspecialty or country, journal/publication type are emerging since 2015. We noticed that the reasons for retraction are becoming more specific and more diverse. In a meta-analysis of 17 studies focused on different subspecialties, misconduct was responsible for 60% (95% confidence interval [CI], 53-67%) of all retractions while error and publication issues contributed to 17% (95% CI, 12-22%) and 9% (95% CI, 6-13%), respectively. The end year of the retraction period in all included studies and the proportion of misconduct presented a weak positive association (coefficient = 1.3% per year, P = 0.002). Conclusion: Misconduct seems to be the most frequently recorded reason for retraction across empirical analyses of retraction notices, but other reasons are not negligible. Greater specificity of causes and standardization is needed in retraction notices.
Productivity Patterns, Collaboration and Scientific Careers of Authors with Retracted Publications in Clinical Medicine

Zhang Qin,Fu Hui-Zhen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-021-04252-y

IF: 3.801

2022-01-01

Scientometrics

Abstract:Problematic publications and scientific misconduct have raised global concern, in which the authors have played a key role. Since research misconduct occurs more frequently in the clinical medicine field, we took this field as an example to explore productivity patterns, collaboration, and scientific careers of authors at the individual level. The application of Lotka's law (C = 0.883, n = 3.597) showed a loose collaboration network and a predominant aggregation of authors with multiple retracted publications. Most authors were retracted only once while a small group of authors had most retracted publications. Authors with most retractions appeared to have stable collaboration with certain individuals. The occurrences of falsification and ethical issues increased with the higher involvement of authors with multiple retracted publications. Two typical publication patterns of retractions in different stages of scientific career have been found: (1) committing scientific misconduct in the early career, mainly for promotion, and (2) participating in scientific misconduct when mature in the career, most due to neglecting the duty as a supervisor. The team culture, regulations, publication policies, and joint efforts by the scientific community have a direct influence on the occurrences of scientific misconduct. Conclusions are made with a focus on the need for more actions to prevent scientific misconduct and to strengthen scientific norms and integrity.
Patterns of retractions from 1981-2020 : Does a fraud lead to another fraud?

Kiran Sharma

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2011.13091

2020-11-26

Digital Libraries

Abstract:Misconduct accounts for the majority of retracted scientific publications and this database reveals the disturbing trend in science~\citep{fang2012misconduct, brainard2018massive}. The objective of the study is to find the association among the authors' collaboration, the number of retracted papers, the number of retracted citations, journal impact factor, and research areas. We present a detailed analysis of 12231 research papers indexed by Web of Science (WoS) as retracted publications from 1981-2020. The study demonstrates the collaboration patterns of retracted publications where 61.5% of authors have only one and 24.6% have two retracted papers; however, 2% of authors have more than 10 retracted papers. To study the impact of citing retracted papers, we investigated the retracted papers with citations. The study reveals that 55.2% of retracted papers have been cited at least once, where 25.4% of papers are such papers where at least one citation turned out to be a retraction. This shows the impact of scientific misconduct or fraud on new research. The number of retractions is independent of the journal impact factor and as compared to high impact papers, low impact papers are attracting more citations. We also investigate the citations received by retracted papers published in higher as well as lower impact factor journals. 1/4th of the papers are retracted citations that cited the retracted papers; however, there is no significant relationship exists between the higher impact or lower impact journals with retractions or citations. Finally, how the average team size and average retracted citations vary among different research areas are studied. The study provides an insight that how a fraud leads to another fraud in the scientific world. Also, the rising trend of citations of retracted papers is a serious concern.
Unraveling Retraction Dynamics in COVID-19 Research: Patterns, Reasons, and Implications

Parul Khurana,Ziya Uddin,Kiran Sharma

2024-03-27

Abstract:Amid the COVID-19 pandemic, while the world sought solutions, some scholars exploited the situation for personal gains through deceptive studies and manipulated data. This paper presents the extent of 400 retracted COVID-19 papers listed by the Retraction Watch database until February 2024. The primary purpose of the research was to analyze journal quality and retraction trends. For all stakeholders involved, such as editors, relevant researchers, and policymakers, evaluating the journal's quality is crucial information since it could help them effectively stop such incidents and their negative effects in the future. The present research results imply that one-fourth of publications were retracted within the first month of their publication, followed by an additional 6\% within six months of publication. One-third of the retractions originated from Q1 journals, with another significant portion coming from Q2 (29.8). A notable percentage of the retracted papers (23.2\%) lacked publishing impact, signifying their publication as conference papers or in journals not indexed by Scopus. An examination of the retraction reasons reveals that one-fourth of retractions were due to numerous causes, mostly in Q2 journals, and another quarter were due to data problems, with the majority happening in Q1 publications. Elsevier retracted 31 of the papers, with the majority published in Q1, followed by Springer (11.5), predominantly in Q2. Retracted papers were mainly associated with the USA, China, and India. In the USA, retractions were primarily from Q1 journals followed by no-impact publications; in China, it was Q1 followed by Q2, and in India, it was Q2 followed by no-impact publications. The study also examined author contributions, revealing that 69.3 were male contributors, with females (30.7) mainly holding middle author positions.

Digital Libraries
Analysis of Retractions from Hospitals in Mainland China from 2017-2019

Tianye Zhao,Tiancong Dai,Zhijun Lun,Yanli Gao

DOI: https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-16354/v1

2020-03-10

Abstract:Abstract Objective : The aim of this study is to analyze the features of retractions from hospitals in mainland China, and to discuss the causes of research misconduct by Chinese doctors. Research Methods : PubMed, Web of Science, and Retraction Watch Database were searched to collect eligible records and to extract characteristics of the included entries, including publishers and Open Access status of the journals involved, ORCID, PubPeer comments before the retraction, whether there are authors from Grade A, Third-class hospitals, and whether there are response or requirements from authors. Results : 521 retractions were included. Retractions were found primarily from authors of grade A, third-class hospitals, a limited regions, and published in journals with medium and high impact factor. The main reasons for retractions were Data Manipulation/Fabrication/Fraud(27.1%), Error by Author(19.9%), Plagiarism(16.7%), Self-Plagiarism(9.1%), Fake Peer Review(7.6%) and Forged Authorship(6.3%). Most of the retracted publications have neither ORCID nor PubPeer comments before their retraction. Conclusion : This is the first report focus on the retractions from hospitals in mainland China. The large number of retractions from Chinese hospitals in recent years is worrying. The results suggests that some retractions are related to third-parties. Some features of retractions are centralized, and it is difficult to evaluate the role of ORCID and PubPeer in the retractions during this period.
Penicillin-binding protein 2x of Streptococcus pneumoniae: enzymic activities and interactions with beta-lactams.

Marc Jamin,Christian Damblon,Christian Damblon,S. Millier,S. Millier,R. Hakenbeck,R. Hakenbeck,J. Frère,J. Frère

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1042/BJ2920735

IF: 3.766

1993-06-15

Biochemical Journal

Abstract:The high-molecular-mass penicillin-binding protein (PBP) 2x, one of the primary targets of beta-lactam antibiotics in Streptococcus pneumoniae, has been produced as a soluble form and purified in large amounts. It has been shown to catalyse hydrolysis and transfer reactions with different ester and thiolester substrates and its catalytic behaviour was often similar to that of the soluble DD-peptidase from Streptomyces R61. This provided an easy method to monitor the activity of the PBP. For the first time, a reliable kinetic study of the interaction between a lethal target and beta-lactam antibiotics has been performed. Characteristic kinetic parameters were obtained with different beta-lactam compounds. These results not only validated the mechanism established with non-essential extracellular enzymes, but will also constitute the basis for comparative studies of the low-affinity variants from penicillin-resistant strains.
Retractions in Rehabilitation and Sport Sciences Journals: A Systematic Review

Sinan Kardeş,William Levack,Kağan Özkuk,Ebru Atmaca Aydın,Serap Seringeç Karabulut

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2020.03.010

Abstract:Objective: To identify the characteristics of retracted publications in rehabilitation and sport sciences journals. Data sources: The Web of Science, PubMed, and Retraction Watch databases were searched from inception to August 2019. Study selection: Retracted publications published in rehabilitation or sport sciences journals, indexed in the Science Citation Index Expanded (SCIE) and Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI) were included. Data extraction: One author extracted the data. Two other authors checked the data. Data synthesis: A total of 37 and 52 retracted publications and their retraction notices were identified for rehabilitation and sport sciences, respectively. The majority of retracted publications (68% of all retracted papers in rehabilitation and 54% of all retracted papers in sport sciences) were published in the past decade. Retracted publications in rehabilitation and sport sciences were published in 21 and 22 different journals and originated from 18 and 21 different countries, respectively. The full-text of the retracted publications was available with a retraction watermark or note for 59% of cases in rehabilitation and 58% in sport sciences. The reasons for the retractions were more often attributed to misconduct (79% and 61%) than to honest error (21% and 39%) in rehabilitation and sport sciences, respectively. However, a reason was not stated for 15% of the publications. The median time interval between publication and retraction was 622 days in rehabilitation and 607 days in sport sciences publications. Conclusions: The total number of retracted publications in rehabilitation and sport sciences journals was small. The retracted publications have been published in a variety of rehabilitation and sport sciences journals and came from different countries across the world. Several retracted publications and retraction notices failed to adhere to The Committee on Publication Ethics guidelines in the handling of full-text (retain with a watermark or note) or stating the underlying reasons for the retraction.

[Study of the Chinese drug shi-hu(Dendrobium). I. Investigation of botanical origin and the drug (author's transl)].

Influence of the conditions of trypsin immobilization onto Spherosil on coupling efficiency

A Comparative Study on Characteristics of Retracted Publications Across Different Open Access Levels

[Effect of metoprolol on the expression of GRK2 in lymphocyte of advanced elderly patients with chronic heart failure].

Prevalence, Characteristics, and Trends in Retracted Spine Literature: 2000-2023

Analysis of the retraction papers in oncology field from Chinese scholars from 2013 to 2022

Visibility of retractions: a cross-sectional one-year study

Review of retracted papers in the field of neurology

A Multi-dimensional Investigation of the Effects of Publication Retraction on Scholarly Impact

New procedure for direct bioautographic TLC assay as applied to a tincture of Ranunculus bulbosus.

Collaboration and Its Influence on Retraction Based on Retracted Publications During 1978–2017

Price Index Convergence Among Indian Cities : A Cointegration Approach

Red Cell Sorbitol Levels During Hyper and Hypoglycaemic Clamp Studies in Insulin‐dependent Diabetic Patients

A Systematic Review of Retracted Publications in Clinical Orthopaedic Research

Causes for Retraction in the Biomedical Literature: A Systematic Review of Studies of Retraction Notices

Productivity Patterns, Collaboration and Scientific Careers of Authors with Retracted Publications in Clinical Medicine

Patterns of retractions from 1981-2020 : Does a fraud lead to another fraud?

Unraveling Retraction Dynamics in COVID-19 Research: Patterns, Reasons, and Implications

Analysis of Retractions from Hospitals in Mainland China from 2017-2019

Penicillin-binding protein 2x of Streptococcus pneumoniae: enzymic activities and interactions with beta-lactams.

Retractions in Rehabilitation and Sport Sciences Journals: A Systematic Review