Evaluation of retracted publications in Dentistry: A systematic review

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The objective of retracting flawed publications is to maintain the integrity of scientific literature. Retractions in the dental literature have been on the rise in recent years. Hence, we aimed to review retracted articles related to dentistry. METHODS: A search was conducted of the MEDLINE database for retracted articles in the dental literature published between April 1, 1993 and March 31, 2020. The retracted articles and the notices of retraction were reviewed, and the findings are presented. RESULTS: During the selected period, 143 articles were retracted. Redundant publication (n=50, 35%) was the most common reason for retraction, followed by plagiarism (n=43, 30.1%) and data manipulation (n=42, 29.4%). Around 70.6% (n=101) of retracted articles were original articles. Eight (5.6%) of the articles were single authored. The retracted articles have been cited by about 1300 publications, after the date of publication of the retraction notice. The gap between publication and retraction was longer for funded articles than for non-funded articles, and for articles retracted for data manipulation than for articles retracted for other types of misconduct. Twenty-one journals and nine authors retracted two or more papers. The majority of authors of retracted articles (224, 37%) were from India. CONCLUSION: Our study showed that the retraction of publications due to misconduct such as duplicate publication, plagiarism, data manipulation is a matter of concern and calls for strict measures to curb the menace of research misconduct.

Ähnliche Arbeiten