Evaluating the Clarity of Retractions and the Spread of Misinformation in Otolaryngology.

Objective: To evaluate the clarity of retraction notices in otolaryngology journals and examine the relationship between retraction notice clarity and improper post-retraction citations.

Study design: A retrospective analysis of retracted articles in otolaryngology journals from journal inception to August 1, 2024.

Setting: Articles were selected from leading otolaryngology journals with citation data retrieved from major academic databases.

Methods: Retracted articles were identified using the Retraction Watch Database. Citation patterns were analyzed through Google Scholar and Scopus. Retraction notices were evaluated for adherence to Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines. The study included 80 retracted articles, with 1398 citations in Google Scholar and 714 in Scopus. Primary outcomes included the proportion of retraction notices meeting COPE guidelines and the rate of improper post-retraction citations.

Results: Retraction notices adhered to COPE guidelines in 52.5% of cases (N = 42). Among 80 retracted articles, only 42.5% were labeled as retracted across all platforms. Alarmingly, 98.2% of citations that occurred after articles were retracted did not acknowledge their retracted status. Clearer retraction notices correlated with fewer improper citations. Proper labeling across all platforms led to a 52.89% reduction in citation rates, whereas any missing labels resulted in only a 28.72% reduction.

Conclusion: Clarity in retraction notices significantly impacts improper citation rates. Standardized, prominently displayed retraction notices adhering to ethical guidelines can reduce misinformation. Strengthening retraction practices and improving database integration are recommended to enhance the effectiveness of retractions and maintain scientific integrity.