Retracted science and the retraction index.
Level 5 - mechanism / opinion, no new human data
Editorial introducing a bibliometric metric without clinical or systematic trial data
PubMed 21825063 · doi:10.1128/IAI.05661-11
What was done
The authors evaluated journal retraction frequency across scientific publications using a newly proposed metric called the retraction index to assess variations among journals and its relationship with journal impact factor.
What was found
The abstract reports that retraction frequency varies across journals and exhibits a strong correlation with journal impact factor. The abstract reports no numerical values, correlation statistics, or sample sizes.
Why it matters
It suggests that higher-impact journals experience higher relative rates of retractions, introducing a metric to evaluate how scientific literature corrections occur across journals.
Limits
The abstract reports no sample size, time frame, specific journals examined, or quantitative statistical parameters. As an editorial introducing a bibliometric index, it cannot establish the causal mechanism behind the correlation between impact factor and retraction frequency.
Cited by
- context The pressure on researchers to publish landmark papers in top-tier journals is one of the primary drivers of scientific fraud.