Characteristics of Retractions from Korean Medical Journals in the KoreaMed Database: A Bibliometric Analysis

Sun Young Huh · Soo Young Kim · Hye Min Cho

29 citations0/0 files storedPLoS ONE

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Academic integrity and plagiarism scientometrics and bibliometrics research Academic Publishing and Open Access

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Flawed or misleading articles may be retracted because of either honest scientific errors or scientific misconduct. This study explored the characteristics of retractions in medical journals published in Korea through the KoreaMed database. METHODS: We retrieved retraction articles indexed in the KoreaMed database from January 1990 to January 2016. Three authors each reviewed the details of the retractions including the reason for retraction, adherence to retraction guidelines, and appropriateness of retraction. Points of disagreement were reconciled by discussion among the three. RESULTS: Out of 217,839 articles in KoreaMed published from 1990 to January 2016, the publication type of 111 articles was retraction (0.051%). Of the 111 articles (addressing the retraction of 114 papers), 58.8% were issued by the authors, 17.5% were jointly issued (author, editor, and publisher), 15.8% came from editors, and 4.4% were dispatched by institutions; in 5.3% of the instances, the issuer was unstated. The reasons for retraction included duplicate publication (57.0%), plagiarism (8.8%), scientific error (4.4%), author dispute (3.5%), and other (5.3%); the reasons were unstated or unclear in 20.2%. The degree of adherence to COPE's retraction guidelines varied (79.8%-100%), and some retractions were inappropriate by COPE standards. These were categorized as follows: retraction of the first published article in the case of duplicate publication (69.2%), authorship dispute (15.4%), errata (7.7%), and other (7.7%). CONCLUSION: The major reason for retraction in Korean medical journals is duplicate publication. Some retractions resulted from overreaction by the editors. Therefore, editors of Korean medical journals should take careful note of the COPE retraction guidelines and should undergo training on appropriate retraction practices.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 29 citations exist upstream.

References

2012Misconduct accounts for the majority of retracted scientific publications 2010Retractions in the scientific literature: is the incidence of research fraud increasing?2011Why and how do journals retract articles? An analysis of Medline retractions 1988–2008 1998Phenomena of Retraction 2006Retractions in the research literature: misconduct or mistakes?2012Governing knowledge in the scientific community: Exploring the role of retractions in biomedicine 2011Governing Knowledge in the Scientific Community: Exploring the Role of Retractions in Biomedicine

Cited by

2022Comprehensive analysis of retracted journal articles in the field of veterinary medicine and animal health 2021Recommendations from the Reducing the Inadvertent Spread of Retracted Science: Shaping a Research and Implementation Agenda Project 2022Retracted systematic reviews continued to be frequently cited: a citation analysis 2019More detailed guidance on the inclusion/exclusion of retracted articles in systematic reviews is needed 2019How many retracted articles indexed in KoreaMed were cited 1 year after retraction notification

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.