SZodixStudyAcademic Library
ShelvesOpen access
Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated
We need to talk about systematic fraud
0 references·8 citing·35 second hop
We need to talk about systematic fraud (2019)We need to talk about systematic fraudVerification of nucleotide sequence reagent identities in original publications in high impact factor cancer research journals (2024)Verification of nucleotide se…Paper Mills – Research report from COPE & STM (2024)Paper Mills – Research report…How to fight fake papers: a review on important information sources and steps towards solution of the problem (2024)How to fight fake papers: a r…A harm reduction approach to improving peer review by acknowledging its imperfections (2024)A harm reduction approach to …The effectiveness of peer review in identifying issues leading to retractions (2023)The effectiveness of peer rev…Retraction Stigma and its Communication via Retraction Notices (2022)Retraction Stigma and its Com…Procrastination and inconsistency: Expressions of concern for publications with compromised integrity (2022)Procrastination and inconsist…The peer review process: Yesterday, today and tomorrow (2019)The peer review process: Yest…Peer Review: A Flawed Process at the Heart of Science and Journals (2006)Double-blind review favours increased representation of female authors (2007)THE SOCIOLOGY OF SCIENCE:: Theoretical and Empirical Investigations (2017)Article processing speed in the Indian Journal of Dermatology, Venereology and Leprology (2020)Peer review practices in academic medicine: how the example of orthopaedic surgery may help shift the paradigm? (2023)Nature of Prejudice (1954)The Social psychology of intergroup relations (1979)Conceptualizing Stigma (2001)Construction and management of retraction stigma in retraction notices: an authorship-based investigation (2022)What do Retraction Notices Reveal About Institutional Investigations into Allegations Underlying Retractions? (2023)The Citation of Retracted Papers and Impact on the Integrity of the Scientific Biomedical Literature (2025)Research Misconduct, Retraction, and Cleansing the Medical Literature: Lessons from the Poehlman Case (2006)Check for publication integrity before misconduct (2020)Reform retractions to make them more transparent (2020)Misconduct accounts for the majority of retracted scientific publications (2012)A manifesto for reproducible science (2017)Content Analysis: An Introduction to Its Methodology (2019)Are the confidence scores of reviewers consistent with the review content? Evidence from top conference proceedings in AI (2024)Citation network analysis of retractions in molecular biology field (2024)The natural selection of bad science (2016)Over-optimization of academic publishing metrics: observing Goodhart's Law in action (2019)GPT-3: Its Nature, Scope, Limits, and Consequences (2020)Distortion of journal impact factors in the era of paper mills (2023)Machine learning based screening of potential paper mill publications in cancer research: methodological and cross sectional study (2026)China's Publication Bazaar (2013)Digital magic, or the dark arts of the 21 st century—how can journals and peer reviewers detect manuscripts and publications from paper mills? (2020)Publication and collaboration anomalies in academic papers originating from a paper mill: Evidence from a Russia‐based paper mill (2023)Wakefield's article linking MMR vaccine and autism was fraudulent (2011)Tradition and Innovation in Scientists’ Research Strategies (2015)1,500 scientists lift the lid on reproducibility (2016)An extra pair of eyes: adopting innovative approaches to detect integrity issues in Naunyn–Schmiedeberg’s Archives of Pharmacology (2025)Authors must follow the editorial guidelines on the use of large language models in review papers (2025)Open science and transparency are our strongest tools in the fight against fraudulent publishing activities (2025)Not So Different After All: A Cross-Discipline View Of Trust (1998)Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science (2015)
this work references cited by second hop

References

No references inside the corpus for this window.

Cited by

  • 2024How to fight fake papers: a review on important information sources and steps towards solution of the problem25 cited
  • 2022Retraction Stigma and its Communication via Retraction Notices22 cited
  • 2023The effectiveness of peer review in identifying issues leading to retractions17 cited
  • 2024Verification of nucleotide sequence reagent identities in original publications in high impact factor cancer research journals14 cited
  • 2022Procrastination and inconsistency: Expressions of concern for publications with compromised integrity11 cited
  • 2024A harm reduction approach to improving peer review by acknowledging its imperfections8 cited
  • 2019The peer review process: Yesterday, today and tomorrow7 cited
  • 2024Paper Mills – Research report from COPE & STM5 cited

Only edges whose both ends are imported exist here. Widen the year window, or show the whole map. Back to the work