Các bài viết bị rút lại trong lĩnh vực phục hồi chức năng: chỉ là phần nổi của tảng băng chìm? Phân tích thư tín học
Tóm tắt
Khối lượng các công bố bị rút lại trong các lĩnh vực khoa học đã tăng trưởng đều đặn, nhưng có rất ít nhận thức về vấn đề này trong lĩnh vực phục hồi chức năng. Mục tiêu của nghiên cứu này là phân tích mức độ các bài viết bị rút lại liên quan đến phục hồi chức năng.
Các bài viết bị rút lại đã được tìm kiếm trong 4 cơ sở dữ liệu thư mục khác nhau từ khi thành lập đến tháng 4 năm 2020: PubMed, Web of Science, WikiLetters và Retraction Watch. Ba người đánh giá độc lập đã đánh giá sự liên quan của các bài viết thu được đối với lĩnh vực phục hồi chức năng.
Trong số 280 công bố liên quan đến phục hồi chức năng bị rút lại từ năm 1984 đến 2020, có 83 bài (29,6%) được công bố trong 55 tạp chí truy cập mở hoàn toàn và 197 bài (70,4%) được công bố trong 147 tạp chí truyền thống, không truy cập mở hoặc tạp chí lai. Trong 10 năm qua (2009–2018), đã có sự gia tăng đáng kể trong cả tổng số bài bị rút lại (
Từ khóa
Tài liệu tham khảo
COPE Council. COPE guidelines: retraction guidelines. Version 2; 2019. https://doi.org/10.24318/cope.2019.1.4.
Steen RG. Retractions in the scientific literature: do authors deliberately commit research fraud? J Med Ethics. 2011;37(2):113–7.
Steen RG. Retractions in the medical literature: who is responsible for scientific integrity? AMWA J. 2011;26(1):2–7.
Sheth BP, Thaker VS. Scientific retraction: a synonym for pseudoscience? Acta Bioeth. 2014;20(1):93–7.
Armstrong D, Winstein KJ. Top pain scientist fabricated data in studies, hospital says. Wall St J. 2009;A:12.
Tyler E. Medical research fraud risks millions of patients’ lives in Europe. 2011. https://healthland.time.com/2011/03/07/medical-research-fraud-risks-millions-of-patients-lives-in-europe/. Accessed 9 Apr 2020.
Fang FC, Steen RG, Casadevall A. Misconduct accounts for the majority of retracted scientific publications. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2012;109(42):17028–33.
Samp JC, Schumock GT, Pickard AS. Retracted publication in the drug literature. Pharmacotherapy. 2012;32(7):586–95.
Budd JM, Sievert M, Schultz TR. Phenomena of retraction: reasons for retraction and citations to the publications. JAMA. 1998;280(3):296–7.
Budd JM, Sievert M, Schultz TR, Scoville C. Effects of article retraction on citation and practice in medicine. Bull Med Libr Assoc. 1999;87(4):437–43.
Wager E, Barbour V, Yentis S, Kleinert S, on behalf of COPE Council. Retraction: Guidance from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Croat Med J. 2009;50(6):532–5.
Wager E, Williams P. Why and how do journals retract articles? An analysis of Medline retractions 1988–2008. J Med Ethics. 2011;37(9):567–70.
Singh HP, Mahendra A, Yadav B, Singh H, Arora N, Arora M. A comprehensive analysis of articles retracted between 2004 and 2013 from biomedical literature - a call for reforms. J Tradit Complement Med. 2014;4(3):136–9.
Cokol M, Iossifov I, Rodriguez-Esteban R, Rzhetsky A. How many scientific papers should be retracted? EMBO Rep. 2007;8(5):422–3.
Steen RG. Retractions in the scientific literature: is the incidence of research fraud increasing? J Med Ethics. 2011;37(4):249–53.
Grieneisen ML, Zhang M. A comprehensive survey of retracted articles from the scholarly literature. PLoS One. 2012;7(10):e44118.
Fanelli D. How many scientists fabricate and falsify research? A systematic review and meta-analysis of survey data. PLoS One. 2009;4(5):e5738.
Korpela KM. How long does it take for the scientific literature to purge itself of fraudulent material? The Breuning case revisited. Curr Med Res Opin. 2010;26(4):843–7.
Neale AV, Dailey RK, Abrams J. Analysis of citations to biomedical articles affected by scientific misconduct. Sci Eng Ethics. 2010;16(2):251–61.
Nath SB, Marcus SC, Druss BG. Retractions in the research literature: misconduct or mistake? Med J Aust. 2006;185(3):152–4.
Xin H. Scientific misconduct. Retractions put spotlight on China’s part-time professor system. Science. 2009;323(5919):1280–1.
Lee CS, Schrank A. Incubating innovation or cultivating corruption? The developmental state and the life sciences in Asia. Soc Forces. 2010;88(3):1231–56.
Woolley KL, Lew S, Stretton JA, Ely NJ, Bramich JR, et al. Lack of involvement of medical writers and the pharmaceutical industry in publications retracted for misconduct: a systematic, controlled, retrospective study. Curr Med Res Opin. 2011;27(6):1175–82.
Ghazinoori S, Ghazinoori S, Azadegan-Mehr M. Iranian academia. Evolution after revolution and plagiarism as a disorder. Sci Eng Ethics. 2011;17(2):213–6.
Steen RG. Retractions in the medical literature: how many patients are put at risk by flawed research? J Med Ethics. 2011;37(11):688–92.
Naik G. Mistakes in the scientific studies surge. Wall St J. 2011;A:1–12.
Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, Mulrow C, Gøtzsche PC, Ioannidis JP, Clarke M, Devereaux PJ, Kleijnen J, Moher D. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. J Clin Epidemiol. 2009;62(10):e1–34.
Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) Codes – Subdisciplines. https://www.pedro.org.au/wp-content/uploads/PEDro_codes.pdf. September 2017. Accessed 20 Apr 2020.
Kardeş S, Levack W, Özkuk K, Atmaca Aydın E, Seringeç Karabulut S. Retractions in rehabilitation and sport sciences journals: a systematic review. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2020.03.010 [Epub ahead of print].
King EG, Oransky I, Sachs TE, et al. Analysis of retracted articles in the surgical literature. Am J Surg. 2018;216:851–5.
Chambers LM, Michener CM, Falcone T. Plagiarism and data falsification are the most common reasons for retracted publications in obstetrics and gynaecology. BJOG. 2019;126:1134–40.
Rai R, Sabharwal S. Retracted publications in orthopaedics: prevalence, characteristics, and trends. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2017;99:e44.
Al-Ghareeb A, Hillel S, McKenna L, Cleary M, Visentin D, Jones M, Bressington D, Gray R. Retraction of publications in nursing and midwifery research: a systematic review. Int J Nurs Stud. 2018;81:8–13.
Wasiak J, Hamilton DG, Foroudi F, Faggion CM Jr. Surveying retracted studies and notices within the field of radiation oncology. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2018;102:660–5.
Pantziarka P, Meheus L. Journal retractions in oncology: a bibliometric study. Future Oncol. 2019;15(31):3597–608.
Atlas MC. Retraction policies of high-impact biomedical journals. J Med Libr Assoc. 2004;92(2):242–50.
Resnik DB, Wager E, Kissling GE. Retraction policies of top scientific journals ranked by impact factor. J Med Libr Assoc. 2015;103(3):136–9.
Jureidini JN, McHenry L. Conflicted medical journals and the failure of trust. Accountabil Res. 2011;18(1):45–54.
Smith J, Godlee F. Investigating allegations of scientific misconduct. Journals can do only so much; institutions need to be willing to investigate. BMJ. 2005;331(7511):245–6.
Errami M, Sun Z, Long TC, George AC, Garner HR. Déjà vu: a database of highly similar citations in the scientific literature. Nucl Acids Res. 2009;37(Database issue):D921–4.
Kleinert S. Checking for plagiarism, duplicate publication, and text recycling. Lancet. 2011;377(9775):281–2.
Vercelli S, Ravizzotti E, Paci M. Are they publishing? A descriptive cross-sectional profile and bibliometric analysis of the journal publication productivity of Italian physiotherapists. Arch Physiother. 2018;8:1.
Sovacool BK. Exploring scientific misconduct: isolated individuals, impure institutions, or an inevitable idiom of modern science? J Bioeth Inq. 2008;5(4):271–82.
Cook CE, Cleland JA, Mintken PE. Manual therapy cures death: I think I read that somewhere. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2018;48(11):830–2.
Beall’s list of predatory journals and publisher. https://beallslist.weebly.com. Accessed 20 Apr 2020.
Iwamoto J, Matsumoto H, Takeda T. Retraction note to: efficacy of menatetrenone (vitamin K2) against non-vertebral and hip fractures in patients with neurological diseases: meta-analysis of three randomized, controlled trials. Clin Drug Investig. 2018;38(5):479.
Torgerson DJ. Caution to readers about systematic review on vitamin K and prevention of fractures that included problematic trials. JAMA Intern Med. 2018;178(6):863–4.