Back to basics: avoiding errors in scientific research and publications

Bojana Obradović

Abstract


The number of scientific publications is constantly increasing accompanied with an increasing number of manuscript retractions, yet at a relatively low rate of 0.04 %. The major concern is fraud and different kinds of scientific misconduct that were found in about half of the retracted manuscripts. The rest was due to unintentional errors discovered after the manuscripts were published. Still, the impact of these intentional or unintentional published errors may be high even if the manuscript is retracted. Several studies have reported continuous citations of retracted manuscripts extending up to several years after retraction. Also, the vast majority of these citations were non-negative or positive (without the reference to retraction) implying that the authors were not aware of retraction. Such superficial reviews of the published literature especially if the original works are not consulted could be a source of mistakes and inconsistencies that could be further propagated in the scientific literature and difficult to eradicate.

Full Text:

PDF (264 kB)

References


Brainard J, You J. What a massive database of retracted papers reveals about science publishing’s ‘death penalty’. Science, 2018; doi:10.1126/science.aav8384

Bolboacă SD, Buhai D-V, Aluaş M, Bulboacă AE. Post retraction citations among manuscripts reporting a radiology-imaging diagnostic method. PLoS ONE. 2019; 14(6): e0217918.

Bucci EM. On zombie papers. Cell Death Dis. 2019; 10:189

Tien C. Remarks on adsorption manuscripts revised and declined: An editorial. J Hazard Mater. 2008; 150: 2–3.

Tran HN, You S-J, Hosseini-Bandegharaei A, Chao H-P. Mistakes and inconsistencies regarding adsorption of contaminants from aqueous solutions: A critical review. Water Res. 2017; 120: 88-116

Kopinke F-D, Georgi A, Goss K-U. Comment on “Mistakes and inconsistencies regarding adsorption of contaminants from aqueous solution: A critical review, published by Tran et al. [Water Research 120, 2017, 88e116]”. Water Res. 2018; 129: 520-521

Zhang JZ. Avoiding spurious correlation in the analysis of chemical kinetic data. Chem Commun. 2011; 47: 6861–6863

Bolster CH, Hornberger GM. On the use of linearized Langmuir equations. Soil Sci Soc Am J. 2008; 71: 1796-1806

Allison DB, Brown AW, George BJ, Kaiser KA. Reproducibility: A tragedy of errors, Nature. 2016; 530(7588): 27–29

Nuijten MB. Preventing statistical errors in scientific journals, Eur Sci Ed. 2016; 42(1): 8-10

Francis G. The frequency of excess success for articles in Psychological Science. Psychon B Rev. 2014; 21:1180-1187

Pulverer B. When things go wrong: correcting the scientific record. EMBO J. 2015; 34(20): 2483-2485




DOI: https://doi.org/10.2298/HEMIND190630018O

Copyright (c) 2019 _ HEMIJSKA INDUSTRIJA

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.