Characteristics of Retracted Publications From Kazakhstan: An Analysis Using the Retraction Watch Database.
Ethics
Kazakhstan
Peer Review
Plagiarism
Publications
Retraction of Publication
Scientific Misconduct
Journal
Journal of Korean medical science
ISSN: 1598-6357
Titre abrégé: J Korean Med Sci
Pays: Korea (South)
ID NLM: 8703518
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
27 Nov 2023
27 Nov 2023
Historique:
received:
22
07
2023
accepted:
22
08
2023
medline:
29
11
2023
pubmed:
28
11
2023
entrez:
28
11
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Retraction is a correction process for the scientific literature that acts as a barrier to the dissemination of articles that have serious faults or misleading data. The purpose of this study was to investigate the characteristics of retracted papers from Kazakhstan. Utilizing data from Retraction Watch, this cross-sectional descriptive analysis documented all retracted papers from Kazakhstan without regard to publication dates. The following data were recorded: publication title, DOI number, number of authors, publication date, retraction date, source, publication type, subject category of publication, collaborating country, and retraction reason. Source index status, Scopus citation value, and Altmetric Attention Score were obtained. Following the search, a total of 92 retracted papers were discovered. One duplicate article was excluded, leaving 91 publications for analysis. Most articles were retracted in 2022 (n = 22) and 2018 (n = 19). Among the identified publications, 49 (53.9%) were research articles, 39 (42.9%) were conference papers, 2 (2.2%) were review articles, and 1 (1.1%) was a book chapter. Russia (n = 24) and China (n = 5) were the most collaborative countries in the retracted publications. Fake-biased peer review (n = 38), plagiarism (n = 25), and duplication (n = 14) were the leading causes of retraction. The vast majority of the publications were research articles and conference papers. Russia was the leading collaborative country. The most prominent retraction reasons were fake-biased peer review, plagiarism, and duplication. Efforts to raise researchers' understanding of the grounds for retraction and ethical research techniques are required in Kazakhstan.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Retraction is a correction process for the scientific literature that acts as a barrier to the dissemination of articles that have serious faults or misleading data. The purpose of this study was to investigate the characteristics of retracted papers from Kazakhstan.
METHODS
METHODS
Utilizing data from Retraction Watch, this cross-sectional descriptive analysis documented all retracted papers from Kazakhstan without regard to publication dates. The following data were recorded: publication title, DOI number, number of authors, publication date, retraction date, source, publication type, subject category of publication, collaborating country, and retraction reason. Source index status, Scopus citation value, and Altmetric Attention Score were obtained.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Following the search, a total of 92 retracted papers were discovered. One duplicate article was excluded, leaving 91 publications for analysis. Most articles were retracted in 2022 (n = 22) and 2018 (n = 19). Among the identified publications, 49 (53.9%) were research articles, 39 (42.9%) were conference papers, 2 (2.2%) were review articles, and 1 (1.1%) was a book chapter. Russia (n = 24) and China (n = 5) were the most collaborative countries in the retracted publications. Fake-biased peer review (n = 38), plagiarism (n = 25), and duplication (n = 14) were the leading causes of retraction.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
The vast majority of the publications were research articles and conference papers. Russia was the leading collaborative country. The most prominent retraction reasons were fake-biased peer review, plagiarism, and duplication. Efforts to raise researchers' understanding of the grounds for retraction and ethical research techniques are required in Kazakhstan.
Identifiants
pubmed: 38013646
pii: 38.e390
doi: 10.3346/jkms.2023.38.e390
pmc: PMC10681843
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e390Informations de copyright
© 2023 The Korean Academy of Medical Sciences.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors have no potential conflicts of interest to disclose.
Références
BMC Res Notes. 2014 Jun 25;7:395
pubmed: 24965905
J Korean Med Sci. 2022 Feb 14;37(6):e44
pubmed: 35166080
J Korean Med Sci. 2022 May 09;37(18):e142
pubmed: 35535370
J Korean Med Sci. 2019 Apr 08;34(13):e99
pubmed: 30950249
J Korean Med Sci. 2017 Jun;32(6):887-892
pubmed: 28480644
Aesthet Surg J. 2023 Oct 13;43(11):NP943-NP948
pubmed: 37474313
Arch Dermatol Res. 2023 Nov;315(9):2571-2573
pubmed: 37395752
Eur J Neurol. 2023 Dec;30(12):3896-3903
pubmed: 37399125
J Korean Med Sci. 2021 May 17;36(19):e126
pubmed: 34002546
Clin Exp Dent Res. 2020 Aug;6(4):383-390
pubmed: 32233020
BMJ. 2023 Jun 20;381:e072929
pubmed: 37339808
J Korean Med Sci. 2023 Apr 10;38(14):e104
pubmed: 37038641
BMJ Open. 2021 Jul 21;11(7):e050270
pubmed: 34290071
BMC Med. 2015 Oct 01;13:230
pubmed: 26423063
J Korean Med Sci. 2021 Oct 11;36(39):e247
pubmed: 34636502
J Korean Med Sci. 2021 Aug 16;36(32):e207
pubmed: 34402225
Sci Eng Ethics. 2020 Dec;26(6):3455-3463
pubmed: 33146787
Scientometrics. 2022;127(3):1431-1438
pubmed: 35001989
Iran J Public Health. 2021 Jun;50(6):1300-1301
pubmed: 34540758
J Korean Med Sci. 2015 Dec;30(12):1915-9
pubmed: 26713071
Rheumatol Int. 2021 Nov;41(11):2015-2023
pubmed: 34499195
Pain. 2023 Nov 1;164(11):2397-2404
pubmed: 37310441
J Korean Med Sci. 2021 May 31;36(21):e144
pubmed: 34060259
J Korean Med Sci. 2018 Dec 26;34(2):e6
pubmed: 30636943
Gac Sanit. 2019 Jul - Aug;33(4):356-360
pubmed: 29776690