More detailed guidance on the inclusion/exclusion of retracted articles in systematic reviews is needed (Papers: July 2019)

Posted by saviorteam in Research Integrity on August 20, 2019
Keywords: Journal, Medical research, Publication ethics, Research integrity, Research results, Researcher responsibilities

The Linked Original Item was Posted On July, 12 2019

A forced retraction will generally (but not always) point to something seriously wrong with a research output/project, so it is essential they don’t result in a distortion of knowledge and practice. This recent journal paper suggests a sensible approach.

There are currently no clear guidelines on how to proceed when a retracted article is selected in the systematic review process. The Cochrane handbook provides information only on how to identify retracted articles within the scientific literature, instead of clear guidance and criteria for inclusion in the systematic review or not [1]. Other guidelines for conducting systematic reviews do not address this topic [2,3]. Common sense would indicate the exclusion from a systematic review of a study that was retracted because of faked or unreliable data [4].
.

Faggion, C. M., Jr. “More detailed guidance on the inclusion/exclusion of retracted articles in systematic reviews is needed.” Journal of Clinical Epidemiology. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2019.07.006
Publisher: https://www.jclinepi.com/article/S0895-4356(19)30573-6/abstract

Citation of retracted publications: A challenging problem (Papers: Mark J Bolland, et al | February 2021)

Practices for Research Integrity Promotion in Research Performing Organisations and Research Funding Organisations: A Scoping Review (Papers: Rea Ščepanović, et al | January 2021)

Continued post-retraction citation of a fraudulent clinical trial report, 11 years after it was retracted for falsifying data (Papers: Jodi Schneider, et al | October 2020)

ACN - 101321555 | ABN - 39101321555

Australasian Human Research Ethics Consultancy Services Pty Ltd (AHRECS)