ArticleJournal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA2022
Retracted publications in pharmacy systematic reviews.
Article in Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Which commercial Chinese polyherbal preparations combined with ACEI/ARB is effective and safe for IgA nephropathy? A systematic review and network meta-analysis.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Pooled it
- Antiviral Medications for Treatment of Nonsevere Influenza: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.JAMA internal medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Antivirals for treatment of severe influenza: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.Lancet (London, England) · 2024Pooled it
- Analysis of Retracted Publications in the Diabetes Literature.Medical journal of the Islamic Republic of Iran · 2026Article
- Fake publications in biomedical science: red-flagging method indicates mass production.Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology · 2026Article
- Citation Contamination by Paper Mill Articles in Systematic Reviews of the Life Sciences.JAMA network open · 2025Article
- The importance of rigor in pharmacy research: Challenges and solutions.Research in social & administrative pharmacy : RSAP · 2025Article
- What Can We Learn from the Retraction of Medical Articles.Medical science educator · 2025Article
- Plagiarism in Publications: All about Being Fair!The Indian journal of radiology & imaging · 2025Article
- Reducing the residue of retractions in evidence synthesis: ways to minimise inappropriate citation and use of retracted data.BMJ evidence-based medicine · 2024Article
- Analysis of Retracted Publications in Medical Literature Due to Ethical Violations.Journal of Korean medical science · 2023Article
- The relationship between methodological quality and the use of retracted publications in evidence syntheses.Systematic reviews · 2023Article
- An analysis of retracted papers in Computer Science.PloS one · 2023Article
- Characteristics of global retractions of schizophrenia-related publications: A bibliometric analysis.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2022Article
- Systematic Review Reporting - Writing concisely and precisely.Pakistan journal of medical sciencesArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveSystematic reviews and other evidence syntheses, the pinnacle of the evidence pyramid, embody comprehensiveness and rigor; however, retracted data are being incorporated into these publications. This study examines the use of retracted publications in the field of pharmacy, describes characteristics of retracted publications cited by systematic reviews, and discusses factors associated with citation likelihood.
methodsUsing data from Retraction Watch, we identified retracted publications in the pharmacy field. We identified all articles citing these retracted publications in Web of Science and Scopus and limited results to systematic reviews. We classified the retraction reason, determined whether the citation occurred before or after retraction, and analyzed factors associated with the likelihood of systematic reviews citing a retracted publication.
resultsOf 1,396 retracted publications, 283 were cited 1,096 times in systematic reviews. Most (65.0%) (712/1096) citations occurred before retraction. Citations were most often to items retracted due to data falsification or manipulation (39.2%), followed by items retracted due to ethical misconduct including plagiarism (30.4%), or concerns about or errors in data or methods (26.2%). Compared to those not cited in systematic reviews, cited items were significantly more likely to be retracted due to data falsification and manipulation, were published in high impact factor journals, and had longer delays between publication and retraction.
conclusionsFurther analysis of systematic reviews citing retracted publications is needed to determine the impact of flawed data. Librarians understand the nuances involved and can advocate for greater transparency around the retraction process and increase awareness of challenges posed by retractions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.