Retracted publications in medical journals: a cross-sectional, cross-disciplinary analysis.

IF 1.6 4区医学 Q2 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL

Swiss medical weekly Pub Date : 2026-04-27 DOI:10.57187/4685

Paul Sebo

{"title":"Retracted publications in medical journals: a cross-sectional, cross-disciplinary analysis.","authors":"Paul Sebo","doi":"10.57187/4685","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: To quantify the number and proportion of retracted publications across 131 high-impact medical journals spanning nine clinical disciplines and to compare retraction rates and the proportion of misconduct-related retractions across journals and disciplines.Methods: This cross-sectional study analysed all retracted publications in 131 top-ranked journals (15 per discipline) in anaesthesiology, dermatology, general internal medicine, gynaecology/obstetrics, neurology, oncology, paediatrics, psychiatry and radiology. Journals were selected using the 2023 Journal Impact Factor from Clarivate's Journal Citation Reports. Retractions were identified in the Retraction Watch Database (RWD), PubMed and the Web of Science from journal inception to 15 December 2024. Retraction rates per 1000 publications were calculated using total publication output indexed in PubMed. The proportion of misconduct-related retractions was determined based on the RWD classification.Results: 878 retracted publications have been identified among 422,827 publications in total, corresponding to a retraction rate of 2.1 per 1000. Among the 811 retractions with available data on reasons, 542 (66.8%) were attributed to misconduct. Retraction rates and the proportion of misconduct-related retractions varied widely across disciplines. Anaesthesiology accounted for the highest retraction rate (7.0 per 1000) and the highest proportion of misconduct-related retractions (88.9%). All authors with ≥20 retracted articles were anaesthetists based in Japan or Germany.Conclusion: Retractions and misconduct-related retractions are unevenly distributed across disciplines. These findings underscore the importance of strengthening editorial oversight and promoting research integrity.","PeriodicalId":22111,"journal":{"name":"Swiss medical weekly","volume":"156 ","pages":"4685"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2026-04-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Swiss medical weekly","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.57187/4685","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To quantify the number and proportion of retracted publications across 131 high-impact medical journals spanning nine clinical disciplines and to compare retraction rates and the proportion of misconduct-related retractions across journals and disciplines.

Methods: This cross-sectional study analysed all retracted publications in 131 top-ranked journals (15 per discipline) in anaesthesiology, dermatology, general internal medicine, gynaecology/obstetrics, neurology, oncology, paediatrics, psychiatry and radiology. Journals were selected using the 2023 Journal Impact Factor from Clarivate's Journal Citation Reports. Retractions were identified in the Retraction Watch Database (RWD), PubMed and the Web of Science from journal inception to 15 December 2024. Retraction rates per 1000 publications were calculated using total publication output indexed in PubMed. The proportion of misconduct-related retractions was determined based on the RWD classification.

Results: 878 retracted publications have been identified among 422,827 publications in total, corresponding to a retraction rate of 2.1 per 1000. Among the 811 retractions with available data on reasons, 542 (66.8%) were attributed to misconduct. Retraction rates and the proportion of misconduct-related retractions varied widely across disciplines. Anaesthesiology accounted for the highest retraction rate (7.0 per 1000) and the highest proportion of misconduct-related retractions (88.9%). All authors with ≥20 retracted articles were anaesthetists based in Japan or Germany.

Conclusion: Retractions and misconduct-related retractions are unevenly distributed across disciplines. These findings underscore the importance of strengthening editorial oversight and promoting research integrity.

查看原文本刊更多论文

医学期刊上撤回的出版物：横断面、跨学科分析。

目的：量化涵盖9个临床学科131种高影响力医学期刊的撤稿数量和比例，并比较不同期刊和学科的撤稿率和与不当行为相关的撤稿比例。方法：本横断面研究分析了麻醉、皮肤病学、普通内科、妇产科、神经病学、肿瘤学、儿科、精神病学和放射学等131种顶级期刊（每个学科15种）的所有撤刊文章。期刊的选择使用Clarivate期刊引用报告中的2023期刊影响因子。从期刊创刊到2024年12月15日，撤稿记录在撤稿观察数据库（RWD）、PubMed和Web of Science中。每1000篇出版物的撤稿率是使用PubMed索引的总出版物产出来计算的。根据RWD分类确定与不当行为相关的撤稿比例。结果：在422,827篇论文中，共发现878篇论文被撤稿，撤稿率为2.1 / 1000。在811篇有数据可查的撤稿原因中，542篇（66.8%）是由于不当行为。撤稿率和与不当行为相关的撤稿比例在不同学科之间差异很大。麻醉科的撤稿率最高（7.0 / 1000），与不端行为相关的撤稿比例最高（88.9%）。所有撤稿≥20篇的作者均为日本或德国的麻醉师。结论：论文撤稿及不当行为相关撤稿在不同学科间的分布不均匀。这些发现强调了加强编辑监督和促进研究诚信的重要性。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Swiss medical weekly 医学-医学：内科

CiteScore

5.00

自引率

0.00%

发文量

审稿时长

3-8 weeks

期刊介绍： The Swiss Medical Weekly accepts for consideration original and review articles from all fields of medicine. The quality of SMW publications is guaranteed by a consistent policy of rigorous single-blind peer review. All editorial decisions are made by research-active academics.