Identification of Streptococcus gallolyticus in tumor samples of Iranian patients diagnosed with colorectal cancer.

OBJECTIVE: Clinical outcomes of infection by S. gallolyticus have not been investigated extensively. We aimed to determine the prevalence of S. gallolyticus in tumor specimens obtained from Iranian patients diagnosed with colorectal cancer. Polymerase chain reaction was used to confirm the presence of S. gallolyticus in patients' tissue samples. RESULTS: Of 176 patients, 65 were diagnosed with colorectal cancer whereas 111 did not have any colon disease. No correlation was found between age, colonization with S. gallolyticus, gender, or risk factors. Overall, 72 (40%) patients carried S. gallolyticus; only 29% of the patients without colorectal cancer were positive for S. gallolyticus. Diagnosis of colorectal cancer and presence of S. gallolyticus significantly correlated (P = 0.006; odds ratio = 1.46; 95% CI = 1.21-3.87). Among the patients with colorectal cancer, 39 (60%) were positive with S. gallolyticus (P = 0.006) whereas 33 of 111 (29.7%) control subjects were positive for S. gallolyticus (P > 0.05); thus, 70.3% of the control subjects were not infected with S. gallolyticus. We found a high prevalence of S. gallolyticus among an Iranian cohort of patients with colorectal cancer. Despite previous reports, we report a positive correlation between colorectal cancer and S. gallolyticus colonization.

Learning from Retracted Papers Authored by the Highly Cited Iran-affiliated Researchers: Revisiting Research Policies and a Key Message to Clarivate Analytics.

Reasons underlying retractions of papers authored by the Iran-affiliated highly cited researchers (HCRs) have not been documented. Here, we report that 229 of the Iran-affiliated researchers were listed by the Clarivate Analytics as HCRs. We investigated the Retraction Watch Database and found that, in total, 51 papers authored by the Iran-affiliated HCRs were retracted from 2006 to 2019. Twenty-three of the 229 HCRs (10%) had at least one paper retracted. One of the listed HCRs had 22 papers retracted; 14 of the 23 (60.8%) had only one paper retracted. Among the 51 retracted papers, three had been authored by two female authors. Eight (16.8%) retracted papers had international co-authorships. The shortest and longest times from publication to retraction were 20 and 2610 (mean ± SD, 857 ± 616) days, respectively. Of the 51 papers, 43 (84%) had a single reason for retraction, whereas eight had multiple reasons. Among the 43 papers, 23 (53%) were retracted due to fake peer-review, eight (19%) were duplications, six (14%) had errors, four (9%) had plagiarism, and two (5%) were labelled as "limited or no information." Duplication of data, which is easily preventable, amounted to 27%. Any publishing oversight committed by an HCR may not be tolerated because they represent the stakeholders of the scientific literature and stand as role-models for other peer researchers. Future policies supporting the Iranian academia should radically change by implementation of educational and awareness programs on publishing ethics to reduce the rate of retractions in Iran.

Plagiarism, Fake Peer-Review, and Duplication: Predominant Reasons Underlying Retractions of Iran-Affiliated Scientific Papers.

Retractions of scientific papers published by some Iran-affiliated scientists in the preceding decade have attracted much attention and publicity; however, the reasons for these retractions have not been documented. We searched the Retraction Watch Database to enumerate the retracted Iran-affiliated papers from December 2001 to December 2019 and aimed to outline the predominant reasons for retractions. The reasons included fake peer-review, authorship dispute, fabricated data, plagiarism, conflict of interest, erroneous data, and duplication. The Fisher's exact test was used to investigate the associations between retractions and their underlying reasons. We selected P < 0.05 to indicate the statistically significant differences. We found 697 retracted papers. Duplication (27%), plagiarism (26%), and fake peer-review (21%) were the most frequent reasons for retractions. Our study highlights the importance of urgent intervention to prevent the misconduct and questionable research practices that lead to retractions in Iran. Continually educating the scientists and postgraduate students about the ethics and norms of scientific publishing is an important measure to ensure publication of reliable, worthy, and impactful papers.