Olivia Newton John Cancer Research Institute, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia; Department of Paediatrics, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Division of Radiation Oncology and Cancer Imaging, Peter MacCallum Cancer Center, Melbourne, Australia.
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2018 Nov 1;102(3):660-665. doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2018.06.028. Epub 2018 Jun 28.
The purpose of this study was to characterize retracted studies within the field of radiation oncology.
Computerized searches were performed in Ovid MEDLINE, PubMed, Ovid EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library up to May 2017 looking for retracted studies using the terms "retraction note," "retracted note," "withdrawn" and "radiotherapy," and "radiation oncology." Additional studies were identified by hand-searching 10 discipline-specific journals. Two authors independently screened papers and then extracted author demographics, journal characteristics, and retraction-specific variables.
Of the 58 studies identified, the most common reasons for retraction were misconduct (43%), methodological error (21%), authorship issues (5%), unknown causes (5%), and journal (administrative) errors (3%). A total of 13 systematic reviews or protocols (22%) were withdrawn from the Cochrane Library for being out-of-date or redundant. All but one retracted study and retraction notice were available in portable document format. Of the 57 retrieved papers, 79% were identified as retracted via in-text notations or watermarks. Overall median time to retraction was 44 months (interquartile range, 11-98 months). However, 42 studies (72%) were still cited after retraction notices were published.
A retracted study within the field of radiation oncology remains a relatively uncommon event. Although promising, our data suggest that the majority of these retracted articles continue to be cited as valid research. As such, there is still a need for clinicians to remain vigilant with their academic rigor and good clinical research practices. There is an urgent need for publication houses to foster universal publishing standards along with discipline-specific retraction guidelines.
本研究旨在描述放射肿瘤学领域中被撤回的研究。
通过计算机检索 Ovid MEDLINE、PubMed、Ovid EMBASE 和 Cochrane Library，检索词为“撤回通知”“撤回说明”“withdrawn”和“放射疗法”“放射肿瘤学”，检索时间截至 2017 年 5 月，寻找撤回的研究。此外，还通过手工检索 10 种专业期刊来识别其他研究。两位作者独立筛选文献，然后提取作者人口统计学信息、期刊特征以及撤回特定的变量。
在确定的 58 项研究中，撤回的最常见原因是不端行为（43%）、方法学错误（21%）、作者身份问题（5%）、原因不明（5%）和期刊（管理）错误（3%）。由于过时或冗余，Cochrane Library 撤回了 13 项系统评价或方案。除了一份撤回的研究和撤回通知外，所有其他的都是可移植文档格式。在检索到的 57 篇论文中，有 79%是通过正文注释或水印识别为撤回的。总的来说，撤回的中位时间为 44 个月（四分位间距 11-98 个月）。然而，在发布撤回通知后，仍有 42 项研究（72%）被引用。
在放射肿瘤学领域，撤回的研究仍然是一个相对罕见的事件。尽管如此，我们的数据表明，这些被撤回的文章中的大多数仍被引用为有效的研究。因此，临床医生仍然需要保持警惕，严格遵守学术规范和良好的临床研究实践。出版机构迫切需要制定通用的出版标准以及特定学科的撤回准则。
