The Citation of Retracted COVID-19 Papers is Common and Rarely Critical

Abstract

Abstract Background Retraction is the final safeguard against research error/misconduct. In principle, retraction exists to prevent serious issues identified in published research through post-publication review. Our study investigated the citing of clinical research papers retracted during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods We used the Retraction Watch database extracted as of 27/01/2022 to identify retracted COVID-19 papers and the Google Scholar citation function to gather a dataset of citations of retracted clinical research. We reviewed key aspects of the citing research. Results In total, the Retraction Watch database included 212 entries for retracted COVID-19 papers. Of these, 53 papers were clinical. There were a total of 1,141 citations of retracted papers, with 105 errors, leaving 1,036 citations to analyze. The majority (86%) of citations were not critical. The majority (80%) of papers citing retracted research were published after the retraction date. Conclusions The citation of retracted and withdrawn COVID-19 clinical studies is common, and rarely critical. Most researchers who cite retracted research do not identify that the paper is retracted, even when submitting long after the paper has been withdrawn. This has serious implications for the reliability of published research and the academic literature, which need to be addressed.

Cite this work

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

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 6 citations exist upstream.

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