Retraction of global scientific publications from 2001 to 2010

Retraction is a self-cleaning activity done in the global science community. In this study, the retraction of global scientific publications from 2001 to 2010 was quantitatively analyzed by using the Science Citation Index Expanded. The results indicated that the number of retractions increased faster compared to the number of global scientific publications. Three very different patterns of retraction existed in each field. In the multi-disciplinary category and in the life sciences, retraction was relatively active. The impact factor strongly correlated with the number of retractions, but did not significantly correlate with the rate of retraction. Although the increases in the number of publications in China, India, and South Korea were faster, their retraction activities were higher than the worldwide average level.

[1]  A Simon Pickard,et al.  Retracted Publications in the Drug Literature , 2012, Pharmacotherapy.

[2]  Tibor Braun,et al.  Relative indicators and relational charts for comparative assessment of publication output and citation impact , 1986, Scientometrics.

[3]  E. Garfield.  Citation analysis as a tool in journal evaluation. , 1972, Science.

[4]  M Sievert,et al.  Phenomena of retraction: reasons for retraction and citations to the publications. , 1998, JAMA.

[5]  Alexander I. Pudovkin,et al.  Rank-normalized impact factor: A way to compare journal performance across subject categories , 2005, ASIST.

[6]  B. Druss,et al.  Retractions in the research literature: misconduct or mistakes? , 2006, The Medical journal of Australia.

[7]  B. K. Sen.  Normalised Impact factor , 1992, J. Documentation.

[8]  Richard Van Noorden.  Science publishing: The trouble with retractions , 2011, Nature.

[9]  R. Steen.  Retractions in the scientific literature: do authors deliberately commit research fraud? , 2010, Journal of Medical Ethics.

[10]  E. Wager,et al.  Why and how do journals retract articles? An analysis of Medline retractions 1988–2008 , 2011, Journal of Medical Ethics.

[11]  D. Fanelli.  How Many Scientists Fabricate and Falsify Research? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Survey Data , 2009, PloS one.

[12]  魏屹东,et al.  Scientometrics , 2018, Encyclopedia of Big Data.

[13]  A. Casadevall,et al.  Retracted Science and the Retraction Index , 2011, Infection and Immunity.

[14]  A. Casadevall,et al.  Misconduct accounts for the majority of retracted scientific publications , 2012, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[15]  Wolfgang Glänzel,et al.  A new classification scheme of science fields and subfields designed for scientometric evaluation purposes , 2004, Scientometrics.

[16]  R VanNoorden.  THE TROUBLE WITH RETRACTIONS , 2011 .