title: Correction and use of biomedical literature affected by scientific misconduct.
abstract: The purpose of this study was to identify and describe published research articles that were named in official findings of scientific misconduct and to investigate compliance with the administrative actions contained in these reports for corrections and retractions, as represented in PubMed. Between 1993 and 2001, 102 articles were named in either the NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts ("Findings of Scientific Misconduct") or the U.S. Office of Research Integrity annual reports as needing retraction or correction. In 2002, 98 of the 102 articles were indexed in PubMed. Eighty-five of these 98 articles had indexed corrections: 47 were retracted; 26 had an erratum; 12 had a correction described in the "comment" field. Thirteen had no correction, but 10 were linked to the NIH Guide "Findings of Scientific Misconduct", leaving only 3 articles with no indication of any sort of problem. As of May 2005, there were 5,393 citations to the 102 articles, with a median of 26 citations per article (range 0-592). Researchers should be alert to "Comments" linked to the NIH Guide as these are open access, and the "Findings of Scientific Misconduct' reports are often more informative than the statements about the retraction or correction found in the journals.
authors: Department of Family Medicine and Public Health Sciences, Wayne State University School of Medicine, 101 E. Alexandrine, Detroit, MI 48201, USA. vneale@med.wayne.edu
authors: Anne Victoria
authors: AV
authors: Neale
authors: Justin
authors: J
authors: Northrup
authors: Rhonda
authors: R
authors: Dailey
authors: Ellen
authors: E
authors: Marks
authors: Judith
authors: J
authors: Abrams
mesh_terms: D015706:Bibliometrics; D006801:Humans; D033181:Information Dissemination; D039781:PubMed; D011643:Publishing / Q000941:ethics; D012180:Retraction of Publication as Topic; D015871:Scientific Misconduct
references: JAMA. 1992 Aug 19;268(7):848
references: 1640594
references: JAMA. 1990 Mar 9;263(10):1420-3
references: 2406475
references: Nature. 1998 Jun 4;393(6684):402
references: 9623989
references: JAMA. 1998 Jul 15;280(3):296-7
references: 9676689
references: Acad Med. 1999 Mar;74(3):221-30
references: 10099640
references: Clin Trials. 2004;1(6):509-16
references: 16279291
references: Cell. 2006 Mar 10;124(5):873-5
references: 16530031
references: Science. 2006 Apr 7;312(5770):38-43
references: 16601164
references: Science. 2006 Apr 7;312(5770):40-1
references: 16601165
references: Ann Intern Med. 2006 Apr 18;144(8):609-13
references: 16522625
references: Bull Med Libr Assoc. 1999 Oct;87(4):437-43
references: 10550028
references: Sci Eng Ethics. 1999 Apr;5(2):183-98
references: 11657856
references: J Med Libr Assoc. 2004 Apr;92(2):242-50
references: 15098054
references: Sci Eng Ethics. 2004 Jul;10(3):483-91
references: 15362705
references: Science. 1983 Apr 1;220(4592):31-5
references: 6828878
references: Science. 1987 Mar 27;235(4796):1566-7
references: 2881355
references: N Engl J Med. 1987 Nov 26;317(22):1383-9
references: 3317039
references: Nature. 1988 Sep 29;335(6189):389
references: 3047586
references: Bull Med Libr Assoc. 1989 Oct;77(4):337-42
references: 2676047
references: JAMA. 1990 Mar 9;263(10):1416-9
references: 2406474
references: N Engl J Med. 1994 May 19;330(20):1448-50
references: 8159201