Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Retracted systematic reviews continued to be frequently cited: a citation analysis.
Wang, Zijun; Shi, Qianling; Zhou, Qi; Zhao, Siya; Hou, Ruizhen; Lu, Shuya; Gao, Xia; Chen, Yaolong.
Afiliación
  • Wang Z; Evidence-based Medicine Center, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China.
  • Shi Q; The First School of Clinical Medicine, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China.
  • Zhou Q; Evidence-based Medicine Center, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China.
  • Zhao S; School of Public Health, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China.
  • Hou R; The First School of Clinical Medicine, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China.
  • Lu S; Department of Pediatric, Sichuan Provincial People's Hospital, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, China; Chinese Academy of Sciences Sichuan Translational Medicine Research Hospital, Chengdu, China.
  • Gao X; The Second School of Clinical Medicine, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China.
  • Chen Y; Evidence-based Medicine Center, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China; Research Unit of Evidence-Based Evaluation and Guidelines, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences (2021RU017), School of Basic Medical Sciences, Lanzhou University Lanzhou, Lanzhou, China; Lanzhou Univ
J Clin Epidemiol ; 149: 137-145, 2022 09.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35636592
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND AND

OBJECTIVES:

To survey the citations of retracted non-Cochrane systematic reviews (SRs) in scientific literature.

METHODS:

We searched the Web of Science and Google Scholar from their inception to 30 April 2020 to find the citations of 153 previously identified retracted non-Cochrane SRs. We calculated the numbers of citations before and after retraction separately. We also described how the citation addressed the retraction and how it was used in the article.

RESULTS:

A We identified 954 citations of 128 retracted SRs. The number of retracted SRs and citations reached the peak in 2014 and 2016, respectively, and the majority of the citations (n = 580, 60.8%) were in articles published after the SR was retracted. The mean number of citation per retracted SRs was 7.5. 2.6 before and 4.5 after the publication of the retraction notice. Twenty-nine (5.0%) citations indicated the retraction of the SRs in the reference section. Nine of these citations supported the retracted SR's results, and 15 disagreed with them.

CONCLUSION:

Retracted SRs continue to be cited after the publication of the retraction notice. Standardized methods are needed to guide the management of retractions and avoid inappropriate citations of retracted articles.
Asunto(s)
Palabras clave

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Banco de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Mala Conducta Científica Tipo de estudio: Qualitative_research Límite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: J Clin Epidemiol Asunto de la revista: EPIDEMIOLOGIA Año: 2022 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: China

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Banco de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Mala Conducta Científica Tipo de estudio: Qualitative_research Límite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: J Clin Epidemiol Asunto de la revista: EPIDEMIOLOGIA Año: 2022 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: China