Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Jun 28, 2026

Digital Planimetry for Assessing Wound Closure Kinetics in a Mouse Model
07:56

Digital Planimetry for Assessing Wound Closure Kinetics in a Mouse Model

Published on: January 10, 2025

Empirical developments in retraction.

B K Redman1, H N Yarandi, J F Merz

  • 1Department of Medical Ethics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA. B.Redman@wayne.edu

Journal of Medical Ethics
|November 1, 2008
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Beta-adrenergic receptor gene polymorphisms and hemodynamic response to dobutamine during dobutamine stress echocardiography.

The pharmacogenomics journal·2008
Same author

The dean of nursing as arbiter, antagonist, and advocate.

Nursing administration quarterly·2008
Same author

Association of CYP3A5 polymorphisms with hypertension and antihypertensive response to verapamil.

Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics·2007
Same author

Review of measurement instruments in clinical and research ethics, 1999-2003.

Journal of medical ethics·2006
Same author

Influence of phenotype and pharmacokinetics on beta-blocker drug target pharmacogenetics.

The pharmacogenomics journal·2006
Same author

A qualitative study of women's views on medical confidentiality.

Journal of medical ethics·2005
Same journal

Ethics briefing.

Journal of medical ethics·2026
Same journal

Medical ethics and categorisation.

Journal of medical ethics·2026
Same journal

Suspension or prioritisation? Exploring the ethics of age-based rationing in adult ADHD services.

Journal of medical ethics·2026
Same journal

Ethics of not knowing who we are talking to in qualitative research.

Journal of medical ethics·2026
Same journal

Suicide is not a public health issue and perhaps very few things should be.

Journal of medical ethics·2026
Same journal

Normalising transparency: an argument for requiring generative AI use declarations in all manuscripts-with a call for commentaries.

Journal of medical ethics·2026
See all related articles

The rate of scientific article retractions is low but rising, primarily due to research errors. Despite retractions occurring sooner, the scientific community often fails to recognize them, necessitating better notification methods.

Area of Science:

  • Bibliometrics
  • Scientific publishing
  • Research integrity

Background:

  • Retractions are crucial for maintaining scientific accuracy.
  • Understanding trends in retractions is essential for research integrity.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To provide current data on scientific article retractions.
  • To analyze reasons for retraction and their trends.
  • To assess the impact of retractions on the scientific record.

Main Methods:

  • Analysis of retraction data.
  • Citation analysis of retracted articles.
  • Review of retraction notice content.

Main Results:

  • Retraction rates are low but increasing.

More Related Videos

A Step by Step Protocol for Subretinal Surgery in Rabbits
12:31

A Step by Step Protocol for Subretinal Surgery in Rabbits

Published on: September 13, 2016

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Jun 28, 2026

Digital Planimetry for Assessing Wound Closure Kinetics in a Mouse Model
07:56

Digital Planimetry for Assessing Wound Closure Kinetics in a Mouse Model

Published on: January 10, 2025

A Step by Step Protocol for Subretinal Surgery in Rabbits
12:31

A Step by Step Protocol for Subretinal Surgery in Rabbits

Published on: September 13, 2016

  • Research errors are the most common reason for retraction.
  • Research misconduct may be underreported as a reason for retraction.
  • Retractions are occurring sooner but are not always recognized by subsequent users.
  • Retractions initiated by parties other than authors are increasing.

    • Conclusions:

    • Editors and institutions are increasing efforts to correct the scientific record.
    • Retraction notice reasons may not always be reliable.
    • Improved methods for notifying the scientific community about retractions are needed.