Skip to content

ACN - 101321555 | ABN - 39101321555

Australasian Human Research Ethics Consultancy Services Pty Ltd (AHRECS)

AHRECS icon
  • Home
  • About Us
    • Consultants
    • Services
  • Previous Projects
  • Blog
  • Resources
  • Feeds
  • Contact Us
  • More
    • Request a Quote
    • Susbcribe to REM
    • Subscribe to VIP
Menu
  • Home
  • About Us
    • Consultants
    • Services
  • Previous Projects
  • Blog
  • Resources
  • Feeds
  • Contact Us
  • More
    • Request a Quote
    • Susbcribe to REM
    • Subscribe to VIP
Exclude terms...
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
AHRECS
Analysis
Animal ethics
Animal Ethics Committee
Animal handling
Animal housing
Animal Research Ethics
Animal Welfare
ANZCCART
Artificial Intelligence
Arts
Australia
Authorship
Belief
Beneficence
Big data
Big data
Biobank
Bioethics
Biomedical
Biospecimens
Breaches
Cartoon/Funny
Case studies
Clinical trial
Collaborative research
Conflicts of interest
Consent
Controversy/Scandal
Controversy/Scandal
Creative
Culture
Data management
Database
Dual-use
Essential Reading
Ethical review
Ethnography
Euthanasia
Evaluative practice/quality assurance
Even though i
First People
Fraud
Gender
Genetics
Get off Gary Play man of the dog
Good practice
Guidance
Honesty
HREC
Human research ethics
Humanities
Institutional responsibilities
International
Journal
Justice
Links
Media
Medical research
Merit and integrity
Methodology
Monitoring
New Zealand
News
Online research
Peer review
Performance
Primary materials
Principles
Privacy
Protection for participants
Psychology
Publication ethics
Questionable Publishers
Research ethics committees
Research integrity
Research Misconduct
Research results
Researcher responsibilities
Resources
Respect for persons
Sample paperwork
sd
se
Serious Adverse Event
Social Science
SoTL
Standards
Supervision
Training
Vulnerability
x
Young people
Exclude news

Sort by

Animal Ethics Biosafety Human Research Ethics Research Integrity

Biased, wrong and counterfeited evidences published during the COVID-19 pandemic, a systematic review of retracted COVID-19 papers (Papers: Angelo Capodici et. al. | November 2022)

Posted by Connar Allen in Research Integrity on January 3, 2023
Keywords: Breaches, Medical research, Peer review, Publication ethics, Research Misconduct

The Linked Original Item was Posted On November, 29 2022

Woman Wearing Medical Mask Cover Eyes. Concept Misinformation. Virus Prevention.

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic and the scientific response became a showcase of science at its best and highlighted how research can benefit humanity.  Sophisticated vaccine development and intense clinical trials were conducted at startling speed.  Drug development which historically took multiple years was achieved in months.  Science didn’t just deliver one vaccine, it delivered several. But it also laid bare the cheats, shonks and charlatans who plague science.  It also demonstrated that our existing systems, peer review and approach to retractions couldn’t quickly and transparently deal with whacky ideas, nutty conspiracy theories or compromised research.  Sensationalist and clickbait journalism didn’t help either.

In 2020 COVID-19 led to an unprecedented stream of papers being submitted to journals. Scientists and physicians all around the globe were in need for information about this new disease. In this climate, many articles were accepted after extremely fast peer-reviews to provide the scientific community with the latest discoveries and knowledge. Unfortunately, this also led to articles retraction due to authors’ misconduct or errors in methodology and/or conclusions. The aim of this study is to investigate the number and characteristics of retracted papers, and to explore the main causes that led to retraction. We conducted a systematic review on retracted articles, using PubMed as data source. Our inclusion criteria were the following: English-language retracted articles that reported original data, results, opinions or hypotheses on COVID-19 and Sars-CoV-2. Twenty-seven retracted articles were identified, mainly reporting observational studies and opinion pieces. Many articles published during the first year of the pandemic have been retracted, mainly due to the authors’ scientific misconduct. Duplications, plagiarism, frauds and absence of consent, were the main reasons for retractions. In modern medicine, researchers are required to publish frequently, and, especially during situations like the COVID-19 pandemic, when articles were rapidly published, gaps in peer-reviews system and in the path to scientific publication arose.

Capodici, A., Salussolia, A., Sanmarchi, F., Gori, D. & Golinelli, D. (2022) Biased, wrong and counterfeited evidences published during the COVID-19 pandemic, a systematic review of retracted COVID-19 papers. Quality & Quantity. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-022-01587-3
Publisher (Open Access): https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11135-022-01587-3

Biased, wrong and counterfeited evidences published during the COVID-19 pandemic, a systematic review of retracted COVID-19 papers - Quality & Quantity
In 2020 COVID-19 led to an unprecedented stream of papers being submitted to journals. Scientists and physicians all around the globe were in need for information about this new disease. In this climate, many articles were accepted after extremely fast peer-reviews to provide the scientific communit…

Related Reading

Biased, wrong and counterfeited evidences published during the COVID-19 pandemic, a systematic review of retracted COVID-19 papers (Papers: Angelo Capodici et. al. | November 2022)

(France) PLOS flags nearly 50 papers by controversial French COVID researcher for ethics concerns – Reaction Watch (Didier Raoult | December 2022)

The Pandemic Uncovered Ways to Speed Up Science – WIRED (Saloni Dattani | October 2022)

(Australia) Retraction inaction: How the pandemic has exposed frailties in scientific publishing – Monash University (Steve Mcdonald | October 2022)

(Australia) Hydroxychloroquine in Australia: a cautionary tale for journalists and scientists – Reuters Institute (Joanna McCarthy | August 2022)

Retractions aren’t a panacea for bad research – The Washington Post (Erin Blakemore | July 2022)

The Citation of Retracted COVID-19 Papers is Common and Rarely Critical (Preprint Papers: Gideon Meyerowitz-Katz, et al | June 2022)

Science in motion: A qualitative analysis of journalists’ use and perception of preprints (Preprint Papers: Alice Fleerackers, et al | February 2022)

How Science Fuels a Culture of Misinformation – Open Mind (Joelle Renstrom | June 2022)

Unethical studies of ivermectin for covid-19 (Editorial: Gideon Meyerowitz-Katz, et al | April 2022)

Stamp out fake clinical data by working together – Nature (Lisa Bero | January 2021)

How bad research clouded our understanding of Covid-19 – Vox (Kelsey Piper | December 2021)

‘Science is flawed’: COVID-19, ivermectin, and beyond – Medical News Today (Gideon Meyerowitz-Katz | December 2021)

(UK) Keele University accepting funds for researcher who shared vaccine misinformation – The Guardian (Patrick Greenfield | February 2021)

The dangers of undercooked science and a hungry public – The Seattle Times (Seth S. Leopold | November 2021)

Six lessons from a pandemic PhD student – Nature (Ciara O’Brien | May 2021)

(UK) Covid 19: How harm reduction advocates and the tobacco industry capitalised on the pandemic to promote nicotine – BMJ Blog (June 2021)

Methodology over metrics: Current scientific standards are a disservice to patients and society (Papers: Ben Van Calster, et al | May 2021)

Science Had a Misinformation Problem Before COVID. Scientists Want to Fix It – Vice (Sarah Wells | May 2021)

Retracting publications doesn’t stop them from influencing science – Massive Science (Fanni Daniella Szakal | March 2021)

(Peru) Scandal over COVID vaccine trial at Peruvian universities prompts outrage – Nature (Luke Taylor | March 2021)

Let’s do better: public representations of COVID-19 science (Papers: Timothy Caulfield, et al | March 2021)

3 Ways the Pandemic Has Made the World Better – The Atlantic (Zeynep Tufekci | March 2021)

Research integrity in the COVID-19 era: insights from Retraction Watch co-founder Ivan Oransky – The Publication Plan (Interview | March 2021)

Communicating Scientific Uncertainty in an Age of COVID-19: An Investigation into the Use of Preprints by Digital Media Outlets (Papers Alice Fleerackers, et al | January 2021)

Changes in the Scientific Information Environment During the COVID-19 Pandemic: The Importance of Scientific Situational Awareness in Responding to the Infodemic – Mary Ann Liebert, Inc (John K. Iskander | December 2020)

(France) French professor faces disciplinary case over hydroxychloroquine claims – The Guardian (November 2020)

Disseminating Scientific Results in the Age of Rapid Communication – EOS (Shobha Kondragunta, et al | October 2020)

(US) The pandemic is rewriting the rules of science. But at what cost? – The Washington Post (Frances Stead Sellers | October 2020)

Efficient Scientific Self-Correction in Times of Crisis (Books: Michèle B. Nuijten | October 2020)

Coronavirus in context: Scite.ai tracks positive and negative citations for COVID-19 literature – Nature (Roxanne Khamsi | May 2020)

Spike in research misconduct feared after Covid disruption – Times Higher Education (Jack Grove | August 2020)

Covid-19 Research Scandals Illustrate What’s Wrong With Science – Elemental (Dana G Smith | August 2020)

(UK) Study: Hydroxychloroquine had no benefit for hospitalized Covid-19 patients, possibly closing door to use of drug – STAT News (Matthew Herper | June 2020)

Despite its big COVID moment, science is in crisis – Crickey (Stephen Bartos | August 2020)

(EU) French hydroxychloroquine study has “major methodological shortcomings” and is “fully irresponsible,” says review, but is not being retracted – Retraction Watch (Ivan Oransky | July 2019)

Science by press release: When the story gets ahead of the science – CNN (Dr. Sanjay Gupta | June 2020)

Covid-19 studies based on flawed Surgisphere data force medical journals to review processes – The Guardian (Melissa Davey | June 2020)

COVID-19 research: pandemic versus “paperdemic”, integrity, values and risks of the “speed science” (Papers: Ricardo Jorge Dinis-Oliveira | April 2020)

Assuring research integrity during a pandemic – BMJopinion (Gowri Gopalakrishna, et al | June 2020)

Fake Science: XMRV, COVID-19, and the Toxic Legacy of Dr. Judy Mikovits (Papers: Stuart J.D. Neil & Edward M. Campbell)

(US) FDA revokes emergency use ruling for hydroxychloroquine, the drug touted by Trump as a Covid-19 therapy – STAT (Lev Facher | June 2020)

Waste in covid-19 research (Editorial – Paul P Glasziou, et al | May 2020)

(France) French hydroxychloroquine-COVID-19 study withdrawn – Retraction Watch (Ivan Oransky | May 2020)

(France) He Was a Science Star. Then He Promoted a Questionable Cure for Covid-19 – New York Times Magazine (Scott Sayare | May 2020)

(Australia) Calls for Australian Defence Force chloroquine COVID-19 drug trial to be halted – ABC News (Grace Tobin | May 2020)

Scientific and Scholarly Meetings in the Time of Pandemic – Scholarly Kitchen (Michael Clarke | April 2020)

Pseudoscience and COVID-19 — we’ve had enough already – Nature (Timothy Caulfield | April 2020)

Hydroxychloroquine-COVID-19 study did not meet publishing society’s “expected standard” – Retraction Watch (Adam Marcus | April 2020)

Is it right to cut corners in the search for a coronavirus cure? – The Guardian (Julian Savulescu | March 2020)

Related Links

  • About the contributors
  • About the keywords
  • Suggest a resource
  • Report problem/broken link
  • Request a Take Down

Compiled here are links, downloads and other resources relating to research integrity and human research ethics. more…

Resources Menu

Four hands solving a jigsaw against the sun blazing out of a cloudy sky

Research Integrity

  • Codes, guidelines, policies and standards
  • Guidance and resource material
  • Papers
  • Books
  • Animal Ethics

Human Research Ethics

  • Codes, guidelines, policies and standards
  • Guidance and resource material
  • Papers
  • Books

Research Ethics Monthly Receive copies of the Research Ethics Monthly directly
by email. We will never spam you.

  • Enter the answer as a word
  • Hidden
    This field is hidden and only used for import to Mailchimp
  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
  • Home
  • Services
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Home
  • Services
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Company
  • Terms Of Use
  • Copyright
  • Privacy Policy
  • Company
  • Terms Of Use
  • Copyright
  • Privacy Policy
  • Site Map
  • Site Map

Australasian Human Research Ethics Consultancy Services Pty Ltd (AHRECS)

Facebook-f Twitter Linkedin-in