Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2016 Oct 5;11(10):e0163588.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0163588. eCollection 2016.

Characteristics of Retractions from Korean Medical Journals in the KoreaMed Database: A Bibliometric Analysis

Affiliations

Characteristics of Retractions from Korean Medical Journals in the KoreaMed Database: A Bibliometric Analysis

Sun Huh et al. PLoS One. .

Abstract

Background: Flawed or misleading articles may be retracted because of either honest scientific errors or scientific misconduct. This study explored the characteristics of retractions in medical journals published in Korea through the KoreaMed database.

Methods: We retrieved retraction articles indexed in the KoreaMed database from January 1990 to January 2016. Three authors each reviewed the details of the retractions including the reason for retraction, adherence to retraction guidelines, and appropriateness of retraction. Points of disagreement were reconciled by discussion among the three.

Results: Out of 217,839 articles in KoreaMed published from 1990 to January 2016, the publication type of 111 articles was retraction (0.051%). Of the 111 articles (addressing the retraction of 114 papers), 58.8% were issued by the authors, 17.5% were jointly issued (author, editor, and publisher), 15.8% came from editors, and 4.4% were dispatched by institutions; in 5.3% of the instances, the issuer was unstated. The reasons for retraction included duplicate publication (57.0%), plagiarism (8.8%), scientific error (4.4%), author dispute (3.5%), and other (5.3%); the reasons were unstated or unclear in 20.2%. The degree of adherence to COPE's retraction guidelines varied (79.8%-100%), and some retractions were inappropriate by COPE standards. These were categorized as follows: retraction of the first published article in the case of duplicate publication (69.2%), authorship dispute (15.4%), errata (7.7%), and other (7.7%).

Conclusion: The major reason for retraction in Korean medical journals is duplicate publication. Some retractions resulted from overreaction by the editors. Therefore, editors of Korean medical journals should take careful note of the COPE retraction guidelines and should undergo training on appropriate retraction practices.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

HM Cho is employed by a commercial company: Infolumi Co, Inforumi. This does not alter our adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials.

Figures

Fig 1
Fig 1. Number of retractions listed in the KoreaMed database from 1999 to 2016.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Furman JL, Jensen K, Murray F. Governing knowledge in the scientific community: exploring the role of retractions in biomedicine. Res Policy. 2012;41: 276–290. 10.1016/j.respol.2011.11.001 - DOI
    1. Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Retraction guidelines [Internet]. COPE; 2009 [cited 2016 Mar 15]. Available: http://publicationethics.org/files/retraction%20guidelines.pdf.
    1. Nath SB, Marcus SC, Druss BG. Retractions in the research literature: misconduct or mistakes? Med J Aust. 2006;185(3): 152–154. - PubMed
    1. Steen RG. Retractions in the scientific literature: is the incidence of research fraud increasing? J Med Ethics. 2011;37(4): 249–253. 10.1136/jme.2010.040923 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Wager E, Williams P. Why and how do journals retract articles? An analysis of Medline retractions 1988–2008. J Med Ethics. 2011;37(9): 567–570. 10.1136/jme.2010.040964 - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources