Cargando…

Post retraction citations among manuscripts reporting a radiology-imaging diagnostic method

Our study aimed to evaluate the trends of post retraction citations of articles reporting a radiology-imaging diagnostic method and to find if a different pattern exists between manuscripts reporting an ultrasound method and those reporting other radiology diagnostic methods. This study reviewed ret...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bolboacă, Sorana D., Buhai, Diana-Victoria, Aluaș, Maria, Bulboacă, Adriana E.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6563977/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31194762
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0217918
_version_ 1783426630135316480
author Bolboacă, Sorana D.
Buhai, Diana-Victoria
Aluaș, Maria
Bulboacă, Adriana E.
author_facet Bolboacă, Sorana D.
Buhai, Diana-Victoria
Aluaș, Maria
Bulboacă, Adriana E.
author_sort Bolboacă, Sorana D.
collection PubMed
description Our study aimed to evaluate the trends of post retraction citations of articles reporting a radiology-imaging diagnostic method and to find if a different pattern exists between manuscripts reporting an ultrasound method and those reporting other radiology diagnostic methods. This study reviewed retractions stored in PubMed on the subject of radiology-imaging diagnosis to identify the motivation, time from publication to retraction, and citations before and after retraction. The PubMed database was searched on June 2017 to retrieve the retracted articles, and the Scopus database was screened to identify the post-retraction citations. The full text was screened to see the type of post-retraction citation (positive/negative) and whether the cited article appears or not as retracted. One hundred and two retractions were identified, representing 3.5% of the retracted articles indexed by PubMed, out of which 54 were included in the analysis. Half of the articles were retracted in the first 24 months after publication, and the number of post retraction citations was higher than the number of citations before retraction in 30 out of 54 cases (US methods: 9/20, other diagnostic methods 21/34, P-value = 0.2312). The plagiarism was the most common reason for retraction (31%), followed by repetitive publication (26%), and errors in data/manuscript (24%). In less than 2% of cases, the retracted articles appear as retracted in the text or reference list, while the negative citation is observed in 4.84% among manuscripts reporting an US diagnostic method and 0.32% among manuscripts reporting a diagnostic method other than US (P-value = 0.0004). No significant differences were observed when post retraction weighted citation index (WCI, no. of citations weighted by citation window) was compared to WCI prior retraction (P-value = 0.5972). In light of the reported results, we enumerated some recommendations that could potentially minimize the referral to retracted studies as valid.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6563977
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-65639772019-06-20 Post retraction citations among manuscripts reporting a radiology-imaging diagnostic method Bolboacă, Sorana D. Buhai, Diana-Victoria Aluaș, Maria Bulboacă, Adriana E. PLoS One Research Article Our study aimed to evaluate the trends of post retraction citations of articles reporting a radiology-imaging diagnostic method and to find if a different pattern exists between manuscripts reporting an ultrasound method and those reporting other radiology diagnostic methods. This study reviewed retractions stored in PubMed on the subject of radiology-imaging diagnosis to identify the motivation, time from publication to retraction, and citations before and after retraction. The PubMed database was searched on June 2017 to retrieve the retracted articles, and the Scopus database was screened to identify the post-retraction citations. The full text was screened to see the type of post-retraction citation (positive/negative) and whether the cited article appears or not as retracted. One hundred and two retractions were identified, representing 3.5% of the retracted articles indexed by PubMed, out of which 54 were included in the analysis. Half of the articles were retracted in the first 24 months after publication, and the number of post retraction citations was higher than the number of citations before retraction in 30 out of 54 cases (US methods: 9/20, other diagnostic methods 21/34, P-value = 0.2312). The plagiarism was the most common reason for retraction (31%), followed by repetitive publication (26%), and errors in data/manuscript (24%). In less than 2% of cases, the retracted articles appear as retracted in the text or reference list, while the negative citation is observed in 4.84% among manuscripts reporting an US diagnostic method and 0.32% among manuscripts reporting a diagnostic method other than US (P-value = 0.0004). No significant differences were observed when post retraction weighted citation index (WCI, no. of citations weighted by citation window) was compared to WCI prior retraction (P-value = 0.5972). In light of the reported results, we enumerated some recommendations that could potentially minimize the referral to retracted studies as valid. Public Library of Science 2019-06-13 /pmc/articles/PMC6563977/ /pubmed/31194762 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0217918 Text en © 2019 Bolboacă et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Bolboacă, Sorana D.
Buhai, Diana-Victoria
Aluaș, Maria
Bulboacă, Adriana E.
Post retraction citations among manuscripts reporting a radiology-imaging diagnostic method
title Post retraction citations among manuscripts reporting a radiology-imaging diagnostic method
title_full Post retraction citations among manuscripts reporting a radiology-imaging diagnostic method
title_fullStr Post retraction citations among manuscripts reporting a radiology-imaging diagnostic method
title_full_unstemmed Post retraction citations among manuscripts reporting a radiology-imaging diagnostic method
title_short Post retraction citations among manuscripts reporting a radiology-imaging diagnostic method
title_sort post retraction citations among manuscripts reporting a radiology-imaging diagnostic method
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6563977/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31194762
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0217918
work_keys_str_mv AT bolboacasoranad postretractioncitationsamongmanuscriptsreportingaradiologyimagingdiagnosticmethod
AT buhaidianavictoria postretractioncitationsamongmanuscriptsreportingaradiologyimagingdiagnosticmethod
AT aluasmaria postretractioncitationsamongmanuscriptsreportingaradiologyimagingdiagnosticmethod
AT bulboacaadrianae postretractioncitationsamongmanuscriptsreportingaradiologyimagingdiagnosticmethod