Abstract
The field of oncology is the main field in medicine with a high rate of retraction. Thus, the purpose of this study was to investigate the trends of retracted publications in oncology, evaluating their bibliographic characteristics and the reasons for the retraction of articles. The research was conducted specifically using a scientometric approach and relying on scientific visualization techniques, where Bibliometrix R Package Software was used to analyze the data. The present research results imply that the number of retracted articles in oncology has increased since 1995. Moreover, the results reveal that China, the United States (US), Japan, Iran, and Italy are the countries in which the number of such articles compared to all other countries is the largest. Analysis of topics covered in such articles shows that the majority of retracted articles in oncology have been associated with apoptosis, proliferation, invasion, migration, colorectal cancer, lung cancer, and breast cancer, and were found most abundantly in two journals: Tumor Biology and Cancer Research. The principal reasons for retractions were: Investigation by Journal/Publisher, Duplication of Image, Fake Peer Review, Investigation by Company/Institution, and Concerns/Issues About Data. Reviewing the reasons why articles have been retracted is important information for editors and editorial boards of oncology journals, related researchers, and policymakers in this field, which could prevent effectively similar events and their adverse consequences in the future.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
source: Web of Science
source: Web of Science
source: Web of Science
source: Web of Science
source: Web of Science
source: Web of Science
source: Web of Science
source: Web of Science
source: Web of Science
source: Web of Science
source: Web of Science
source: Web of Science
source: Web of Science
source: Web of Science
source: Web of Science
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Ahmad, S., Ur Rehman, S., Iqbal, A., Farooq, R. K., Shahid, A., & Ullah, M. I. (2021). Breast cancer research in Pakistan: A bibliometric analysis. SAGE Open, 11(3), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440211046934
Aliukonis, V., Poškutė, M., & Gefenas, E. (2020). Perish or publish dilemma: Challenges to responsible authorship. Medicina, 56(3), 123. https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina56030123
Almeida, R. M. V., de Albuquerque Rocha, K., Catelani, F., Fontes-Pereira, A. J., & Vasconcelos, S. M. (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
Aspura, M. Y. I., Noorhidawati, A., & Abrizah, A. (2018). An analysis of Malaysian retracted papers: Misconduct or mistakes? Scientometrics, 115(3), 1315–1328. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2720-z
Bar-Ilan, J., & Halevi, G. (2017). Post retraction citations in context: A case study. Scientometrics, 113(1), 547–565. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2242-0
Bar-Ilan, J., & Halevi, G. (2018). Temporal characteristics of retracted articles. Scientometrics, 116(3), 1771–1783. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2802-y
Barton, C. J., & Merolli, M. A. (2019). It is time to replace publish or perish with get visible or vanish: Opportunities where digital and social media can reshape knowledge translation. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 53(10), 594–598. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2017-098367
Boyle, P., & Levin, B. (2008). World cancer report 2008. IARC Press, International Agency for Research on Cancer. Retrieved June 14, 2021, from https://publications.iarc.fr/Non-Series-Publications/World-Cancer-Reports/World-Cancer-Report-2008
Bozzo, A., Bali, K., Evaniew, N., & Ghert, M. (2017). Retractions in cancer research: A systematic survey. Research Integrity and Peer Review, 2(1), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41073-017-0031-1
Budd, J.M., Coble, Z.C. & Anderson, K.M. (2011). Retracted publications in biomedicine: Cause for concern. In Association of College and Research Libraries Conference Proceedings, 390–395. Philadelphia, PA. https://www.ala.org/acrl/sites/ala.org.acrl/files/content/conferences/confsandpreconfs/national/2011/papers/retracted_publicatio.pdf
Cabral, B. P., Fonseca, M. D. G. D., & Mota, F. B. (2018). The recent landscape of cancer research worldwide: A bibliometric and network analysis. Oncotarget, 9(55), 30474–30484. https://doi.org/10.18632/oncotarget.25730
Campos-Varela, I., & Ruano-Raviña, A. (2019). Misconduct as the main cause for retraction. A descriptive study of retracted publications and their authors. Gaceta Sanitaria, 33, 356–360. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaceta.2018.01.009
Chambers, L. M., Michener, C. M., & Falcone, T. (2019). Plagiarism and data falsification are the most common reasons for retracted publications in obstetrics and gynaecology. BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 126(9), 1134–1140. https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-0528.15689
Chen, C., Hu, Z., Milbank, J., & Schultzda, T. (2013). A visual analytic study of retracted articles in scientific literature. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 64(2), 234–253. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.22755
Chen, W., Xing, Q. R., Wang, H., & Wang, T. (2018). Retracted publications in the biomedical literature with authors from mainland China. Scientometrics, 114(1), 217–227. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2565-x
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
Copiello, S. (2020). Other than detecting impact in advance, alternative metrics could act as early warning signs of retractions: Tentative findings of a study into the papers retracted by PLoS ONE. Scientometrics, 125(3), 2449–2469. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03698-w
Dal-Ré, R. (2020). Analysis of biomedical Spanish articles retracted between 1970 and 2018. Medicina Clínica (english Edition), 154(4), 125–130. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.medcle.2019.04.033
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
Doyle, J., & Cuthill, M. (2015). Does ‘get visible or vanish’herald the end of ‘publish or perish’? Higher Education Research & Development, 34(3), 671–674. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2015.1025467
Eisenach, J. C. (2009). Data fabrication and article retraction: How not to get lost in the woods. The Journal of the American Society of Anesthesiologists, 110(5), 955–956. https://doi.org/10.1097/ALN.0b013e3181a06bf9
Elango, B., Kozak, M., & Rajendran, P. (2019). Analysis of retractions in Indian science. Scientometrics, 119(2), 1081–1094. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-021-03895-1
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 of the United States of America, 109(42), 17028–17033. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1212247109
Feng, L., Yuan, J., & Yang, L. (2020). An observation framework for retracted publications in multiple dimensions. Scientometrics, 125(2), 1445–1457. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03702-3
Grieneisen, M. L., & Zhang, M. (2012). A comprehensive survey of retracted articles from the scholarly literature. PLoS ONE, 7(10), e44118. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0044118.t002
Gross, C. (2016). Scientific misconduct. Annual Review of Psychology, 67, 693–711. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-122414-033437
Harzing, A. W. (2010). The publish or perish book. Tarma Software Research Pty Limited.
He, T. (2013). Retraction of global scientific publications from 2001 to 2010. Scientometrics, 96(2), 555–561. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-012-0906-3
Heibi, I., & Peroni, S. (2020). A qualitative and quantitative citation analysis toward retracted articles: a case of study. arXiv preprint https://arxiv.org/abs/2012.11475.
Hosseini, M., Hilhorst, M., de Beaufort, I., & Fanelli, D. (2018). Doing the right thing: A qualitative investigation of retractions due to unintentional error. Science and Engineering Ethics, 24(1), 189–206. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-017-9894-2
Hu, G., Yang, Y., & Tang, L. (2019). Retraction and research integrity education in China. Science and Engineering Ethics, 25(1), 325–326. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-017-0017-x
Hwang, K., & Wu, X. (2018). Retracted or withdrawn publications in journals relating to plastic surgery. Journal of Craniofacial Surgery, 29(5), 1114–1116. https://doi.org/10.1097/SCS.0000000000004735
Joob, B., & Wiwanitkit, V. (2019). Retracted publications in emergency medicine. European Journal of Emergency Medicine, 26(1), 71. https://doi.org/10.1097/MEJ.0000000000000506
Van Leeuwen T. N., & Luwel, M. (2014). An in-depth analysis of papers retracted in the Web of Science. In: Proceedings of the Science and Technology Indicators Conference, 2014 Leiden, 337–344.
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
Li, W., & Mol, B. W. (2019). Re: Plagiarism and data falsification are the most common reasons for retracted publications in obstetrics and gynaecology. BJOG: an International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 126(10), 1289. https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-0528.15689
Lüscher, T. F., Fox, K., Hamm, C., Carter, R. E., Taddei, S., Simoons, M., & Crea, F. (2020). Scientific integrity: What a journal can and cannot do. European Heart Journal, 41(48), 4552–4555. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehaa963
Nogueira, T. E., Gonçalves, A. S., Leles, C. R., Batista, A. C., & Costa, L. R. (2017). A survey of retracted articles in dentistry. BMC Research Notes, 10(1), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13104-017-2576-y
Palla, I. A., Singson, M., & Thiyagarajan, S. (2020). A comparative analysis of retracted papers in health sciences from China and India. Accountability in Research, 27(7), 401–416. https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2020.1754804
Pantziarka, P., & Meheus, L. (2019). Journal retractions in oncology: A bibliometric study. Future Oncology, 15(31), 3597–3608. https://doi.org/10.2217/fon-2019-0233
Rai, R., & Sabharwal, S. (2017). Retracted publications in orthopaedics: Prevalence, characteristics, and trends. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, 99(9), e44. https://doi.org/10.2106/jbjs.16.01116
Ribeiro, M. D., & Vasconcelos, S. M. (2018). Retractions covered by Retraction Watch in the 2013–2015 period: Prevalence for the most productive countries. Scientometrics, 114(2), 719–734. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2621-6
Shamim, T. (2018). Data regarding articles retracted from PubMed indexed dental journals from India. Data in Brief, 18, 1069. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dib.2018.03.133
Soltani, P., & Patini, R. (2020). Retracted COVID-19 articles: A side-effect of the hot race to publication. Scientometrics, 125(1), 819–822. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03661-9
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
Teixeira da Silva, J. A., & Dobránszki, J. (2017). Highly cited retracted papers. Scientometrics, 110(3), 1653–1661. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-2227-4
Torre, L. A., Bray, F., Siegel, R. L., Ferlay, J., Lortet-Tieulent, J., & Jemal, A. (2015). Global cancer statistics, 2012. CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians, 65(2), 87–108. https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21262
WHO. (2021). Cancer. Retrieved December 11, 2021, from https://www.who.int/health-topics/cancer
Wohn, D. Y., & Normile, D. (2006). Korean cloning scandal. Prosecutors allege elaborate deception and missing funds. Science, 312(5776), 980–981. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.312.5776.980
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. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03636-w
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank the anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments and suggestions.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Appendix 1
Appendix 1
See Table 6.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Gholampour, B., Gholampour, S., Noruzi, A. et al. Retracted articles in oncology in the last three decades: frequency, reasons, and themes. Scientometrics 127, 1841–1865 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-022-04305-w
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-022-04305-w