School of Information Sciences -- Faculty Publications and Other Works
Source Publication (e.g., journal title)
Journal of Information Science
Author ORCID Identifier
peiling Wang https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4202-7570
jing su https://orcid.org//0000-0001-6699-6806
Document Type
Article
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/01655515221074329
Abstract
Faculty Opinions has provided recommendations of important biomedical publications by domain experts (FMs) since 2001. The purpose of this study is two-fold: 1) identify the characteristics of the expert-recommended articles that were subsequently retracted; 2) investigate what happened after retraction. We examined a set of 232 recommended, later retracted or corrected articles. These articles were classified as New Finding (43%), Interesting Hypothesis (16%), etc. More than 71% of the articles acknowledged funding support; the NIH (US) was a top funder (64%). The top reasons for retractions were Errors of various types (28%); Falsification/fabrication of data, image, or results (20%); Unreliable data, image, or results (16%); and Results not reproducible (16%). Retractions took from less than two months to almost 14 years. Only 15 % of recommendations were withdrawn either after dissents were made by other FMs or after retractions. Most of the retracted articles continue to be cited post-retraction, especially those published in Nature, Science, and Cell. Significant positive correlations were observed between post-retraction citations and pre-retraction citations, between post-retraction citations and peak citations, and between post-retraction citations and the post-retraction citing span. A significant negative correlation was also observed between the post-retraction citing span and years taken to reach peak citations. Literature recommendation systems need to update the changing status of the recommended articles in a timely manner; invite the recommending experts to update their recommendations; and provide a personalized mechanism to alert users who have accessed the recommended articles on their subsequent retractions, concerns, or corrections.
Recommended Citation
Wang, P., & Su, J. (2022). Expert-recommended biomedical journal articles: Their retractions or corrections, and post-retraction citing. Journal of Information Science. https://doi.org/10.1177/01655515221074329
Submission Type
Pre-print
Included in
Health Communication Commons, Health Sciences and Medical Librarianship Commons, Quality Improvement Commons, Scholarly Communication Commons
Comments
Accepted on January 2, 2022.