Department of Computer Science, Gothenburg|Chalmers University, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Department of Computer Science, Brunel University London, Uxbridge, United Kingdom.
PLoS One. 2023 May 9;18(5):e0285383. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0285383. eCollection 2023.
The retraction of research papers, for whatever reason, is a growing phenomenon. However, although retracted paper information is publicly available via publishers, it is somewhat distributed and inconsistent.
The aim is to assess: (i) the extent and nature of retracted research in Computer Science (CS) (ii) the post-retraction citation behaviour of retracted works and (iii) the potential impact upon systematic reviews and mapping studies.
We analyse the Retraction Watch database and take citation information from the Web of Science and Google scholar.
We find that of the 33,955 entries in the Retraction watch database (16 May 2022), 2,816 are classified as CS, i.e., ≈ 8%. For CS, 56% of retracted papers provide little or no information as to the reasons. This contrasts with 26% for other disciplines. There is also some disparity between different publishers, a tendency for multiple versions of a retracted paper to be available beyond the Version of Record (VoR), and for new citations long after a paper is officially retracted (median = 3; maximum = 18). Systematic reviews are also impacted with ≈ 30% of the retracted papers having one or more citations from a review.
Unfortunately, retraction seems to be a sufficiently common outcome for a scientific paper that we as a research community need to take it more seriously, e.g., standardising procedures and taxonomies across publishers and the provision of appropriate research tools. Finally, we recommend particular caution when undertaking secondary analyses and meta-analyses which are at risk of becoming contaminated by these problem primary studies.
无论出于何种原因，撤回研究论文的现象日益增多。然而，尽管出版商公开提供了已撤回论文的信息，但这些信息有些分散且不一致。
旨在评估：（i）计算机科学（CS）领域撤回研究的程度和性质；（ii）已撤回论文的撤后引用行为；（iii）对系统评价和制图研究的潜在影响。
我们分析了 Retraction Watch 数据库，并从 Web of Science 和 Google Scholar 中获取引用信息。
我们发现，在 Retraction Watch 数据库（2022 年 5 月 16 日）的 33955 条记录中，有 2816 条被归类为 CS，即约 8%。对于 CS，56%的撤回论文几乎没有或没有提供有关原因的信息。相比之下，其他学科的这一比例为 26%。不同出版商之间也存在差异，撤后版本的数量多于记录版本（VoR），并且在论文正式撤回后很长时间内仍有新的引用（中位数=3；最大值=18）。系统评价也受到影响，约 30%的撤回论文有一篇或多篇引用自综述。
不幸的是，撤回似乎是科学论文一个相当常见的结果，因此我们作为一个研究社区需要更加认真地对待它，例如，在出版商之间标准化程序和分类法，并提供适当的研究工具。最后，我们建议在进行二次分析和荟萃分析时特别小心，这些分析有被这些有问题的原始研究污染的风险。
