Division of Radiation Oncology and Cancer Imaging, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia.
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2019 Apr 1;103(5):1036-1042. doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2018.11.014. Epub 2018 Nov 20.
The purpose of this study was to quantify the number and explore the nature of citations of retracted articles in the radiation oncology literature occurring after publication of the retraction note.
A list of previously identified retracted articles within the field of radiation oncology was updated in June 2017. The number of publications citing retracted articles was quantified using Google Scholar, Web of Science, and Scopus. Studies citing retracted publications after publication of the retraction note were individually assessed to determine the nature of the reference.
Forty-seven retracted articles were identified for this study. Thirty-seven studies (79%) received 1017 citations before retraction, and 34 articles (72%) received 407 English and 169 foreign-language citations afterward. The average number of citations dropped from 22 to 11 after publication of the retraction note (95% confidence interval, 0.3-21.0, P = .043). Most postretraction citations occurred during the second year after the article's retraction, originated from North America and Asia (N = 124 each, 31%) and Europe (N = 122, 30%), and featured in original articles (N = 254, 62%) and reviews (N = 73, 18%). Of the 358 individually evaluable citing studies, 92% referenced the retracted article as legitimate work. Three guidelines and 15 systematic reviews and meta-analyses were also identified that cited retracted articles as valid work.
Postretraction citations are an avoidable phenomenon. The results of the study emphasize the need for investigators to adhere to good research practices to mitigate the influence and propagation of flawed and unethical research. Journal editors, peer reviewers, and the broader radiation oncology readership should remain diligent in ensuring that citations of retracted work are identified and removed before, during, and possibly even after publication.
本研究旨在量化放射肿瘤学文献中已发表撤稿通知后被引用的撤稿文章的数量和探讨其性质。
2017 年 6 月更新了放射肿瘤学领域内先前确定的撤稿文章清单。使用谷歌学术、Web of Science 和 Scopus 量化了引用撤稿文章的出版物数量。单独评估引用撤稿出版物的研究，以确定引用的性质。
本研究共确定了 47 篇撤稿文章。37 项研究（79%）在撤稿前共收到 1017 次引用，34 篇文章（72%）在撤稿后共收到 407 次英文引用和 169 次非英文引用。撤稿通知发布后，引用量从 22 次平均降至 11 次（95%置信区间，0.3-21.0，P = 0.043）。大多数撤稿后的引用发生在文章撤稿后的第二年，来自北美和亚洲（各 124 次，31%）和欧洲（各 122 次，30%），并以原始文章（254 次，62%）和综述（73 次，18%）为主。在可进行个体评估的 358 项引用研究中，92%将撤稿文章作为合法研究进行了引用。还确定了 3 项指南和 15 项系统评价和荟萃分析，将撤稿文章作为有效工作进行了引用。
撤稿后被引用是一种可以避免的现象。研究结果强调了研究人员需要遵守良好的研究实践，以减轻有缺陷和不道德研究的影响和传播。期刊编辑、同行评审员以及更广泛的放射肿瘤学读者应保持警惕，确保在发表前、发表期间甚至发表后识别和删除对撤稿工作的引用。
