{"id":19989,"date":"2018-11-12T20:00:18","date_gmt":"2018-11-12T14:00:18","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.enago.com\/academy\/?p=19989"},"modified":"2022-04-29T22:51:50","modified_gmt":"2022-04-29T16:51:50","slug":"database-of-retracted-papers-launched-for-researchers","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.enago.com\/academy\/database-of-retracted-papers-launched-for-researchers\/","title":{"rendered":"Database of Retracted Papers Launched for Researchers"},"content":{"rendered":"

Approximately 500\u2013600 papers are retracted each year, either because of scientific misconduct or honest errors. Many of these retractions are due to data that has been fabricated, falsified or plagiarized. How do you find out whether the paper you are reading has been retracted? In the past, this was not so easy, since no-one wants to publicize a retraction. Retraction Watch, who together with Science, recently published a searchable database<\/a> of retracted papers and filled the gap.\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n

A Retracted Papers Database <\/strong><\/h2>\n

You can now easily weed out bad science by doing a search for retracted papers on Retraction Watch. The database contains more than 19,000 papers so far. A useful feature is that reasons for each retraction are given. This database also includes papers with expressions of concern and corrections. Although these papers have not been retracted yet, it is better to be aware of the possible errors<\/a> when reading a paper.<\/p>\n

Another interesting feature of Retraction Watch is the \u201cTop 10 most highly cited retracted papers\u201d list. It is surprising to learn of some well-known papers<\/a> on this list and alarming as well at the medical implications of these papers.\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n

How the Database is Helpful to Researchers?<\/strong><\/h2>\n

Investigations into scientific misconduct take time and are not always transparent. An example is the investigation by Cornell University of Brian Wasink\u2019s nutrition research. The university admitted that Wasink was dismissed for publishing unreliable results<\/a>. However, they have not released any details of the misconduct.<\/p>\n

The Retraction Watch Database is a valuable resource<\/a> that every researcher should consult regularly because it:<\/p>\n