Reducing the inadvertent spread of retracted science

Post-retraction citation

应付recommendations say that "Prompt retraction should minimise the number of researchers who cite the erroneous work, act on its findings, or draw incorrect conclusions". However, post-retraction citation and use of retracted research remains common, and most post-retraction citation appears to be inadvertent (Hsiao & Schneider, manuscript).科学杂志recently analyzed 200 post-retraction citations to two high-profile COVID-19 papers published in May 2020 and retracted in June 2020: over half of the citations did not mention the retraction; they noted that publishers and editors were "caught by surprise" and many do not systematically check for retraction or post-publication corrections(Piller, 2021).

Reducing the inadvertent spread of retracted science: shaping a research and implementation agenda (RISRS) project

“减少撤回科学的无意传播：塑造研究和实施议程”（RISRS）项目寻求解决这个问题。RISRS项目通过涉及文献，利益相关者咨询访谈和三部分利益攸关方研讨会的跨部门磋商程序来推导建议。RISRS项目从Alfred P Sloan基金会的资金开始与2020年的学术出版社中的利益相关者咨询。迄今为止，该项目涉及编辑，研究人员，图书馆员，商业和学术出版商，平台和数据库提供商，研究完整性官员，科学记者，资助，专业组织的工作人员以及标准制定组织的成员。

减少缩回引用的无意引导的建议

The RISRS project is now seeking broad feedback on its recommendations for reducing the inadvertent citation of retracted citation. The top level recommendations are:

1. Prevent retractions from polluting the literature through the public availability of high quality, consistent information about retractions.

2. Make retraction information easy to find and use by using clear and consistent display standards.

3. Recommend a taxonomy of retraction categories/classifications and corresponding retraction metadata that can be adopted by all stakeholders.

4. Develop best practices for coordinating the retraction process.

5. Educate stakeholders about retraction and pre- and post-publication stewardship of the scholarly record.

Your feedback

TheRISRS white paperis currently open for public comment as a preprint. Feedback from COPE members would be particularly welcome in order to refine these recommendations. The implementation agenda mentions multiple areas for COPE to act including establishing working groups to (a) create a standardized taxonomy of retraction categories; (b) refine the workflow template to initiate a retraction inquiry; and (c) encourage adoption of a standard checklist of the information required in a retraction notice. If you have feedback, or are interested in collaborating on efforts to address the continued citation of retracted research, please contactJodi Schneider.

参考

应对理事会（2019年）。应对撤退指南 - 英语。bob官方app出版伦理委员会。版本2：2019年11月。https://doi.org/10.24318/cope.2019.1.4

萧,Tzu-Kun &施耐德,乔迪。继续使用of Retracted Papers: Temporal Trends in Citations and (Lack of) Awareness of Retractions Shown in Citation Contexts in Biomedicine. Manuscript in preparation. Preprint athttps://osf.io/5z2n4/?view_only=c7e1c5ecb59f4b81962700a298dc0326

Piller, Charles (2021). Many scientists citing two scandalous COVID-19 papers ignore their retractions. Science.https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abg5806

Dr.Jodi Schneider (PI), Assistant Professor, School of Information Sciences, University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign

Related resources and articles

Retraction guidelines, COPE

Retraction taxonomy project news: COPE on the working group