Post-publication corrections of rheumatology articles: a comprehensive analysis

With the growing volume of scientific publications in recent years, both unintentional errors and instances of scientific misconduct have become increasingly common. These errors may include typographical mistakes, inaccuracies in author information, and issues in figures, tables, references, or other sections of articles. This study aims to identify and categorize the most frequent errors in rheumatology publications instead of to provide insights for improving the accuracy and credibility of scientific literature.

Articles published and subsequently corrected in the field of rheumatology between 2000 and 2024 were retrieved from the Web of Science database. A total of 1,716 corrected articles were systematically analyzed for the type, frequency, and severity of errors.

A total of 1,825 errors were identified, with 36 articles requiring major corrections. The most frequently affected sections included author names and institutional affiliations (644 errors), tables and figures (537 errors), and the results section (164 errors), followed by funding statements, materials and methods, and references. Less frequent issues included errors related to ethics approval, conflicts of interest, plagiarism, and incorrect data. Proportion of articles with major corrections (36 out of 1,716; 2.1%), 19 of them were retracted and the relative distribution of error types (e.g., author information errors constituted 35.2% of total errors).

Authors, editors, and publishers share responsibility for maintaining the integrity of published research. Sections such as author information, tables, figures, and results are shown to be at high risk for errors. Careful review and editorial oversight can minimize errors, prevent misinterpretation, and enhance the overall reliability of scientific publications.

Not applicable.