Dataset Information

Retracted publications and their citation in dental literature: A systematic review.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVES:The present systematic review aimed to perform an in-depth analysis of the different features of retracted publications in the dental field. MATERIAL AND METHODS:This review has been recorded in the PROSPERO database (CRD42017075634). Two independent reviewers performed an electronic search (Pubmed, Retraction Watch) for retracted articles in dental literature up to December 31, 2018. RESULTS:180 retracted papers were identified, the first published in 2001. Retractions increased by 47% in the last four-year period (2014-2018), when compared with 2009-2013 (94 and 64 retracted publications, respectively). Author misconduct was the most common reason for retraction (65.0%), followed by honest scientific errors (12.2%) and publisher-related issues (10.6%). The majority of retracted research was conducted in Asia (55.6%), with 49 papers written in India (27.2%). 552 researchers (89%) are listed as authors in only one retracted article, while 10 researchers (1.6%) are present in five or more retracted publications. Retracted articles were cited 530 times after retraction: the great majority of these citations (89.6%) did not consider the existence of the retraction notice and treated data from retracted articles as reliable. CONCLUSIONS:Retractions in dental literature have constantly increased in recent years, with the majority of them due to misconduct and fraud. The publication of unreliable research has many negative consequences. Studies derived from such material are designed on potentially incorrect bases, waste funds and resources, and most importantly, increase risk of incorrect treatment for patients. Citation of retracted papers represents a major issue for the scientific community.

SUBMITTER: Rapani A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7453776 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Retracted publications and their citation in dental literature: A systematic review.

Rapani Antonio A Lombardi Teresa T Berton Federico F Del Lupo Veronica V Di Lenarda Roberto R Stacchi Claudio C

Clinical and experimental dental research 20200331 4

<h4>Objectives</h4>The present systematic review aimed to perform an in-depth analysis of the different features of retracted publications in the dental field.<h4>Material and methods</h4>This review has been recorded in the PROSPERO database (CRD42017075634). Two independent reviewers performed an electronic search (Pubmed, Retraction Watch) for retracted articles in dental literature up to December 31, 2018.<h4>Results</h4>180 retracted papers were identified, the first published in 2001. Retr ...[more]

PMID: 32233020

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundMeasures to ensure research integrity have been widely discussed due to the social, economic and scientific impact of research integrity. In the past few years, financial support for health research in emerging countries has steadily increased, resulting in a growing number of scientific publications. These achievements, however, have been accompanied by a rise in retracted publications followed by concerns about the quality and reliability of such publications.ObjectiveThis systematic review aimed to investigate the profile of medical and life sciences research retractions from authors affiliated with Brazilian academic institutions. The chronological trend between publication and retraction date, reasons for the retraction, citation of the article after the retraction, study design, and the number of retracted publications by author and affiliation were assessed. Additionally, the quality, availability and accessibility of data regarding retracted papers from the publishers are described.MethodsTwo independent reviewers searched for articles that had been retracted since 2004 via PubMed, Web of Science, Biblioteca Virtual em Saúde (BVS) and Google Scholar databases. Indexed keywords from Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) and Descritores em Ciências da Saúde (DeCS) in Portuguese, English or Spanish were used. Data were also collected from the Retraction Watch website (www.retractionwatch.com). This study was registered with the PROSPERO systematic review database (CRD42017071647).ResultsA final sample of 65 articles was retrieved from 55 different journals with reported impact factors ranging from 0 to 32.86, with a median value of 4.40 and a mean of 4.69. The types of documents found were erratum (1), retracted articles (3), retracted articles with a retraction notice (5), retraction notices with erratum (3), and retraction notices (45). The assessment of the Retraction Watch website added 8 articles that were not identified by the search strategy using the bibliographic databases. The retracted publications covered a wide range of study designs. Experimental studies (40) and literature reviews (15) accounted for 84.6% of the retracted articles. Within the field of health and life sciences, medical science was the field with the largest number of retractions (34), followed by biological sciences (17). Some articles were retracted for at least two distinct reasons (13). Among the retrieved articles, plagiarism was the main reason for retraction (60%). Missing data were found in 57% of the retraction notices, which was a limitation to this review. In addition, 63% of the articles were cited after their retraction.ConclusionPublications are not retracted solely for research misconduct but also for honest error. Nevertheless, considering authors affiliated with Brazilian institutions, this review concluded that most of the retracted health and life sciences publications were retracted due to research misconduct. Because the number of publications is the most valued indicator of scientific productivity for funding and career progression purposes, a systematic effort from the national research councils, funding agencies, universities and scientific journals is needed to avoid an escalating trend of research misconduct. More investigations are needed to comprehend the underlying factors of research misconduct and its increasing manifestation.

Project description:Background: The objective of this systematic review was to assess the scope and breadth of publicly available prospective cohort and randomized controlled trial (RCT) literature on 100% fruit juice and dental caries or tooth erosion in humans. Methods: We performed a systematic search in MEDLINE/PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science for studies published from inception through May 2018, and the Cochrane Library databases for reports published through January 2018. Prospective cohort studies or RCTs conducted on dental health and 100% fruit juice, and published in English were selected. No restrictions were set for age, sex, geographic location, or socioeconomic status. Results: Eight publications representing five independent prospective cohort studies and nine publications on nine RCTs were included. All prospective cohort studies were in children or adolescents, and all RCTs were in adults. Prospective cohort studies on tooth erosion found no association between juice intake and tooth erosion, while those on dental caries incidence reported either no association or an inverse association between 100% fruit juice intakes and dental caries incidence. RCTs on tooth erosion showed decreased microhardness, increased surface enamel loss, increased erosion depth, greater enamel softening, and/or increased pellicle layer with 100% fruit juice, and those on dental caries showed increased demineralization of enamel slabs with 100% fruit juice. Conclusions: The existing evidence on 100% fruit juice intake and caries and tooth erosion are not conclusive. Overall, prospective cohort studies in children and adolescents found no association between 100% fruit juice intake and tooth erosion or dental caries, but, RCT data in adults suggests that 100% fruit juice could contribute to tooth erosion and dental caries. The RCT data, however, were from small, short-term studies that utilized intra-oral devices generally devoid of normal plaque or saliva action, and generally employed conditions that are not reflective of normal juice consumption.

Dataset Information

Retracted publications and their citation in dental literature: A systematic review.

Publications

Retracted publications and their citation in dental literature: A systematic review.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets