Retracted publications in infectious diseases and clinical microbiology literature: an analysis using the retraction watch database

Abstract

Objectives: We aimed to examine the rate and characteristics of retracted articles in infectious diseases and clinical microbiology.

Methods: Using the Retraction Watch Database, we conducted a cross-sectional study for retracted publications categorized as 'Infectious Disease' or 'Microbiology' until June 30 2022. We included publications for which citation information was available through the Web of Science database. Study characteristics, retraction trends and number of citations before and after the retraction year were analysed.

Results: Overall, 1004 retracted publications were included, retracted between August 1968 and June 2022. The number of retractions climbed through the years, peaking in 2020-2021. A total of 614 retractions originated from USA, China, and India, of total 183 736 PubMed publications from these countries. Overall, 378 (38%) were retracted because of errors; 182 (18%) because of plagiarism; and 142 (14%) because of falsification/fabrication. Specific reasons included 'concerns/issues about data' (158, 16%); 'duplication of image' (127, 13%); and 'unreliable results' (116, 12%). Of the 347 retractions during 2020 to June 2022, 91 (26%) were COVID-19 related. Fifty of 895 (5.6%) first authors had two retracted papers, and 14 (1.6%) had ≥2 retractions. Of 824 publications cited at least once, 466 (57%) were cited more often after retraction.

Discussion: Retractions of infectious diseases and clinical microbiology publications are increasing. Concerning reasons such as plagiarism, falsification/fabrication and errors are not uncommon. Nonetheless, these publications continue to be commonly cited after being retracted.

Keywords: Clinical microbiology; Infectious diseases; Methodology; Retraction; Scientific misconduct.