Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Productivity patterns, collaboration and scientific careers of authors with retracted publications in clinical medicine

  • Published:
Scientometrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

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.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Bensman, S. J., & Smolinsky, L. J. (2017). Lotka’s inverse square law of scientific productivity: Its methods and statistics. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 68(7), 1786–1791.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bordons, M., Aparicio, J., González-Albo, B., & Díaz-Faes, A. A. (2015). The relationship between the research performance of scientists and their position in co-authorship networks in three fields. Journal of Informetrics, 9(1), 135–144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Budd, J. M., Sievert, M., Schultz, T. R., & Scoville, C. (1999). Effects of article retraction on citation and practice in medicine. Bulletin of the Medical Library Association, 87(4), 437–443.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cancer and Metastasis Reviews. (2010). Biography—Fazlul H Sarkar, PhD. Cancer and Metastasis Reviews, 29(3), 379–379.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cassao, B. D., Herbella, F. A. M., Schlottmann, F., & Patti, M. G. (2018). Retracted articles in surgery journals What are surgeons doing wrong? Surgery, 163(6), 1201–1206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clair, J. A. (2015). Procedural injustice in the system of peer review and scientific misconduct. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 14(2), 159–172.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cyranoski, D. (2014). Stem-cell pioneer blamed media ‘bashing’ in suicide note. Nature. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature.2014.15715

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, M. S., Riske-Morris, M., & Diaz, S. R. (2007). Causal factors implicated in research misconduct: Evidence from ORI case files. Science and Engineering Ethics, 13(4), 395–414.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elia, N., Wager, E., & Tramer, M. R. (2014). Fate of articles that warranted retraction due to ethical concerns: a descriptive cross-sectional study. PLoS One, 9(1), e85846.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Else, H. (2019). What universities can learn from one of science’s biggest frauds. Nature, 570, 287–288.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fanelli, D., Costas, R., & Larivière, V. (2015). Misconduct Policies, Academic Culture and Career Stage, Not Gender or Pressures to Publish. Affect Scientific Integrity. PLoS One, 10(6), e0127556.

    Article  Google 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foo, J. Y. (2011). A retrospective analysis of the trend of retracted publications in the field of biomedical and life sciences. Science and Engineering Ethics, 17(3), 459–468.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gross, R. A. (2016). Statistics and the detection of scientific misconduct. Neurology, 87(23), 2388–2388.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gross, J., Leib, M., Offerman, T., & Shalvi, S. (2018). Ethical Free Riding: When Honest People Find Dishonest Partners. Psychological Science, 29(12), 1956–1968.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gupta, V., Sahani, A., Mohan, B., & Wander, G. (2013). Negative pressure aerosol containment box: An innovation to reduce COVID-19 infection risk in healthcare workers. Journal of Anaesthesiology Clinical Pharmacology, 4(2), 144–147.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamilton, D. G. (2019). Continued Citation of Retracted Radiation Oncology Literature-Do We Have a Problem? International Journal of Radiation Oncology, 103(5), 1036–1042.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hofmann, B., Helgesson, G., Juth, N., & Holm, S. (2015). Scientific Dishonesty: A Survey of Doctoral Students at the Major Medical Faculties in Sweden and Norway. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics, 10(4), 380–388.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holliday, E., Fuller, C. D., Wilson, L. D., & Thomas, C. R., Jr. (2013). Success breeds success: Authorship distribution in the Red Journal, 1975–2011. International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics, 85(1), 23–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoover, G. A. (2006). A Game-Theoretic Model of Plagiarism. Atlantic Economic Journal, 34(4), 449–454.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Horbach, S. P. J. M., & Halffman, W. (2019). The extent and causes of academic text recycling or ‘self-plagiarism.’ Research Policy, 48(2), 492–502.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Japanese Society of Anesthesiologists (2012). Fujii Yoshitaka-shi ronbun ni kansuru chōsa tokubetsu iinkai hōkoku [Report of the Special Committee for Investigation on Yoshitaka Fujii's Treatise]. Retrieved January 30, 2021 from http://anesth.or.jp/files/download/news/20120629_2.pdf.

  • Justus-Liebig-Universität [JLU] (2011). Verstoß gegen gute wissenschaftliche Praxis [Violation of good scientific practice]. Retrieved January 30, 2021 from https://www.uni-giessen.de/ueber-uns/pressestelle/pm/pm89-11.

  • Justus-Liebig-Universität [JLU] (2012). JLU fällt weitere Entscheidung im Boldt-Komplex [JLU makes another decision in the Boldt complex]. Retrived January 30, 2021 from https://www.uni-giessen.de/ueber-uns/pressestelle/pm/pm131-12.

  • Kawamura, C. D. L. T. Y. K. M. (2009). Lotka’s law and the pattern of scientific productivity in the dental science literature. Medical Informatics and the Internet in Medicine, 24(4), 309–315.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kupferschmidt, K. (2018). Researcher at the center of an epic fraud remains an enigma to those who exposed him. Retrived November 4, 2021 from https://www.science.org/content/article/researcher-center-epic-fraud-remains-enigma-those-who-exposed-him.

  • Kuroda, M. (2012). Disciplinary Decision concerning Dr. Yoshitaka Fujii. Retrived January 30, 2021 from https://www.toho-u.ac.jp/english/information/march_6_2012.html.

  • Kuroki, T., & Ukawa, A. (2018). Repeating probability of authors with retracted scientific publications. Accountability in Research, 25(4), 212–219.

    Article  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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu, X., Bollen, J., Nelson, M. L., & Van de Sompel, H. (2005). Co-authorship networks in the digital library research community. Information Processing & Management, 41(6), 1462–1480.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luther, F. (2010). Scientific misconduct: Tip of an iceberg or the elephant in the room? Journal of Dental Research, 89(12), 1364–1367.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mabou Tagne, A., Cassina, N., Furgiuele, A., Storelli, E., Cosentino, M., & Marino, F. (2020). Perceptions and Attitudes about Research Integrity and Misconduct: A Survey among Young Biomedical Researchers in Italy. Journal of Academic Ethics, 18(2), 193–205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marcus, A., & Oransky, I. (2015). How the Biggest Fabricator in Science Got Caught. Retrieved January 31, 2021 from http://nautil.us/issue/24/error/how-the-biggest-fabricator-in-science-got-caught.

  • Marcus, A. (2012). Major fraud probe of Japanese anesthesiologist Yoshitaka Fujii may challenge retraction record. Retrieved Feburary 4, 2021 from https://retractionwatch.com/2012/03/07/major-fraud-probe-of-japanese-anesthesiologist-yoshitaka-fujii-may-challenge-retraction-record.

  • Mardani, A., Nakhoda, M., & Gooshki, E. S. (2020). Relationship among factors affecting research misconduct in medical sciences in Iran. Accountability in Research, 27(7), 1–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCook, A. (2016). Details of investigative report into Sarkar released by ACLU. Retrieved December 1, 2020 from: https://retractionwatch.com/2016/11/17/details-of-investigative-report-into-sarkar-released-by-aclu/.

  • McHugh, U. M., & Yentis, S. M. (2019). An analysis of retractions of papers authored by Scott Reuben. Joachim Boldt and Yoshitaka Fujii. Anaesthesia, 74(1), 17–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merton, R. K. (1968). The Matthew Effect in Science. Science, 159(3810), 56–63.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, D. (2011). Retraction Note to: Diltiazem may preserve renal tubular integrity after cardiac surgery. Canadian Journal of Anaesthesia, 58(9), 881–882.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mistry, V., Grey, A., & Bolland, M. J. (2019). Publication rates after the first retraction for biomedical researchers with multiple retracted publications. Accountability in Research, 26(5), 277–287.

    Article  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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nature,. (2017). Integrity starts with the health of research groups. Nature, 545(7652), 5–6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nature (2019). Research integrity is much more than misconduct. Retrieved January 30, 2021 from https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-01727-0.

  • O'Connor, J. (2008). Wayne State researcher receives award for potential prostate cancer treatment. Retrieved January 29, 2021 from: https://today.wayne.edu/news/2008/05/29/wayne-state-researcher-receives-award-for-potential-prostate-cancer-treatment-2908.

  • Oransky, I. (2010). After misrepresentation allegations, German anesthesiologist Joachim Boldt out as hospital’s chief physician. Retrieved January 30, 2021 from https://retractionwatch.com/2010/11/26/after-misrepresentation-allegations-german-anesthesiologist-joachim-boldt-out-as-hospitals-chief-physician.

  • Oransky, I. (2019). ‘We badly need to change processes’: How ‘slow, opaque and inconsistent’ journals’ responses to misconduct can be. Retrived November 4, 2021 from https://retractionwatch.com/2019/11/29/we-badly-need-to-change-processes-new-papers-show-how-slow-opaque-and-inconsistent-journals-responses-to-misconduct-can-be/.

  • Palla, I. A., Singson, M., & Thiyagarajan, S. (2020). A comparative analysis of retracted papers in Health Sciences from China and India. Accountability in Research. https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2020.1754804

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palus, S. (2015). Boldt’s retraction count upped to 94, co-author takes legal action to prevent 95th. Retrieved December 1, 2020 from https://retractionwatch.com/2015/10/12/boldts-retraction-count-upped-to-94-co-author-takes-legal-action-to-prevent-95th.

  • Pao, M. L. (1985). Lotka’s law: A testing procedure. Information Processing & Management, 21(4), 305–320.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pinto, M., Escalona-Fernández, M. I., & Pulgarín, A. (2012). Information literacy in social sciences and health sciences: A bibliometric study (1974–2011). Scientometrics, 95(3), 1071–1094.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pratt, T. C., Reisig, M. D., Holtfreter, K., & Golladay, K. A. (2019). Scholars’ preferred solutions for research misconduct: Results from a survey of faculty members at America’s top 100 research universities. Ethics & Behavior, 29(7), 510–530.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pulgarín, A. (2012). Dependence of Lotka’s law parameters on the scientific area. Malaysian Journal of Library & Information Science, 17(1), 41–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rajgoli, I. U., & Laxminarsaiah, A. (2015). Authorship pattern and collaborative research in the field of spacecraft technology. The Electronic Library, 33(4), 625–642.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ronda-Pupo, G. A., & Katz, J. S. (2017). The power law relationship between citation impact and multi-authorship patterns in articles in Information Science & Library Science journals. Scientometrics, 114(3), 919–932.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sabir, H., Kumbhare, S., Parate, A., Kumar, R., & Das, S. (2015). Scientific misconduct: A perspective from India. Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy, 18(2), 177–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saikia, P., & Thakuria, B. (2019). Retraction of papers authored by Yuhji Saitoh - Beyond the Fujii phenomenon. Indian Journal of Anaesthesia, 63(7), 571–584.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stavale, R., Ferreira, G. I., Galvao, J. A. M., Zicker, F., Novaes, M., Oliveira, C. M., & Guilhem, D. (2019). Research misconduct in health and life sciences research: A systematic review of retracted literature from Brazilian institutions. PLoS One, 14(4), e0214272.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steen, R. G. (2011). Retractions in the medical literature: How many patients are put at risk by flawed research? Journal of Medical Ethics, 37(11), 688–692.

    Article  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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tramer, M. R. (2011). The Boldt debacle. European Journal of Anaesthesiology, 28(6), 393–395.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Office of Research Integrity [ORI] (2020). Case Summary: Wang, Zhiwei. Retrieved January 30, 2021 from https://ori.hhs.gov/content/case-summary-wang-zhiwei.

  • Uddin, S., Hossain, L., & Rasmussen, K. (2013). Network effects on scientific collaborations. PLoS One, 8(2), e57546.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Were, E., Kaguiri, E., & Kiplagat, J. (2020). Perceptions of occurrence of research misconduct and related factors among Kenyan investigators engaged in HIV research. Accountability in Research, 27(6), 372–389.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wray, K. B., & Andersen, L. E. (2018). Retractions in Science. Scientometrics, 117(3), 2009–2019.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wright, D. E., Titus, S. L., & Cornelison, J. B. (2008). Mentoring and research misconduct: An analysis of research mentoring in closed ORI cases. Science and Engineering Ethics, 14(3), 323–336.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yi, N., Nemery, B., & Dierickx, K. (2019). Perceptions of research integrity and the Chinese situation: In-depth interviews with Chinese biomedical researchers in Europe. Accountability in Research, 26(7), 405–426.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yin, L.-Z., Kretschmer, H., Hanneman, R. A., & Liu, Z.-Y. (2006). Connection and stratification in research collaboration: An analysis of the COLLNET network. Information Processing & Management, 42(6), 1599–1613.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, M., & Grieneisen, M. (2012). The impact of misconduct on the published medical and non-medical literature, and the news media. Scientometrics, 96(2), 1–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, Z., Van Poucke, S., Goyal, H., Rowley, D. D., Zhong, M., & Liu, N. (2018). The top 2,000 cited articles in critical care medicine: A bibliometric analysis. Journal of Thoracic Disease, 10(4), 2437–2447.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, Q., Abraham, J., & Fu, H.-Z. (2020). Collaboration and its influence on retraction based on retracted publications during 1978–2017. Scientometrics, 125(1), 213–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, Q. & Fu, H.-Z. (2021). Productivity patterns, collaboration and scientific careers of authors with retracted publications in clinical medicine. 18th International Conference on Scientometrics & Informetrics, Working Papers. Belgium.

Download references

Acknowledgements

This study is supported by the Soft Science Research Program of the Zhejiang Provincial Department of Science of Technology (No. 2021C35040).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Information Resources Management, School of Public Affairs, Zhejiang University, No. 866 Yuhangtang Road, Hangzhou, 310058, China

    Qin Zhang & Hui-Zhen Fu

  2. School of Public Policy and Management, Tsinghua University, Beijing, 100084, China

    Qin Zhang

Authors
  1. Qin Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Hui-Zhen Fu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hui-Zhen Fu.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Zhang, Q., Fu, HZ. Productivity patterns, collaboration and scientific careers of authors with retracted publications in clinical medicine. Scientometrics 127, 1883–1901 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-021-04252-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

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

Keywords

Search

Navigation