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
. 2019 Nov;56(11):734-740.
doi: 10.1136/jmedgenet-2019-106137. Epub 2019 Jul 12.

Reasons for and time to retraction of genetics articles published between 1970 and 2018

Affiliations

Reasons for and time to retraction of genetics articles published between 1970 and 2018

Rafael Dal-Ré et al. J Med Genet. 2019 Nov.

Erratum in

Abstract

Introduction: Between 0.02% and 0.04% of articles are retracted. We aim to: (a) describe the reasons for retraction of genetics articles and the time elapsed between the publication of an article and that of the retraction notice because of research misconduct (ie, fabrication, falsification, plagiarism); and (b) compare all these variables between retracted medical genetics (MG) and non-medical genetics (NMG) articles.

Methods: All retracted genetics articles published between 1970 and 2018 were retrieved from the Retraction Watch database. The reasons for retraction were fabrication/falsification, plagiarism, duplication, unreliability, and authorship issues. Articles subject to investigation by company/institution, journal, US Office for Research Integrity or third party were also retrieved.

Results: 1582 retracted genetics articles (MG, n=690; NMG, n=892) were identified . Research misconduct and duplication were involved in 33% and 24% of retracted papers, respectively; 37% were subject to investigation. Only 0.8% of articles involved both fabrication/falsification and plagiarism. In this century the incidence of both plagiarism and duplication increased statistically significantly in genetics retracted articles; conversely, fabrication/falsification was significantly reduced. Time to retraction due to scientific misconduct was statistically significantly shorter in the period 2006-2018 compared with 1970-2000. Fabrication/falsification was statistically significantly more common in NMG (28%) than in MG (19%) articles. MG articles were significantly more frequently investigated (45%) than NMG articles (31%). Time to retraction of articles due to fabrication/falsification was significantly shorter for MG (mean 4.7 years) than for NMG (mean 6.4 years) articles; no differences for plagiarism (mean 2.3 years) were found. The USA (mainly NMG articles) and China (mainly MG articles) accounted for the largest number of retracted articles.

Conclusion: Genetics is a discipline with a high article retraction rate (estimated retraction rate 0.15%). Fabrication/falsification and plagiarism were almost mutually exclusive reasons for article retraction. Retracted MG articles were more frequently subject to investigation than NMG articles. Retracted articles due to fabrication/falsification required 2.0-2.8 times longer to retract than when plagiarism was involved.

Keywords: duplication; fabrication/falsification; genetics; medical genetics; non−medical genetics; plagiarism; research misconduct; retraction notices.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: None declared.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Fang FC, Steen RG, Casadevall A. Misconduct accounts for the majority of retracted scientific publications. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2012;109:17028–33. 10.1073/pnas.1212247109 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. US Department of Health and Human Services 42 cfr parts 50 and 93. public health service policies on research misconduct; final rule. Fed Regist 2005;70:28386–400. - PubMed
    1. Collier R. Shedding light on retractions. CMAJ 2011;183:E385–6. 10.1503/cmaj.109-3827 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Retraction Watch Database The Retraction Watch Database, version: 1.0.5.5. Available: http://retractiondatabase.org/RetractionSearch.aspx
    1. Brainard J, You J. Rethinking retractions. Science 2018;362:390–3. 10.1126/science.362.6413.390 - DOI - PubMed