ArticlePloS one2024
Mapping retracted articles and exploring regional differences in China, 2012-2023.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- How contemporary academic structures constrain scientific creativity and hold back early-career researchers.Nature human behaviour · 2026Review
- Perceptions of Research Integrity Among Medical Researchers in Shanghai Teaching Hospitals: A Cross-Sectional Survey.Developing world bioethics · 2026Article
- Safeguarding the integrity of scientific literature in the 21st century.Pediatric research · 2026Review
- Altmetric Activity and Scientific Integrity: A Retraction Analysis of PubMed-Indexed Social Media-Related Publications.Journal of Korean medical science · 2026Article
- Analysis of Retracted Publications in the Diabetes Literature.Medical journal of the Islamic Republic of Iran · 2026Article
- Analysis of Retracted Publications on Artificial Intelligence: Trends, Ethical Concerns, and Scientific Integrity.Journal of Korean medical science · 2025Article
- Examining retracted papers in the "Radiology, Nuclear Medicine, and Medical Imaging" category in the Web of Science database.Radiologie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2025Article
- Analyzing retraction trends in urology: a comprehensive study over the last decade.World journal of urology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundChina is one of the top countries with the most significant number or proportion of retracted publications, which has garnered significant attention.
methodsUsing the Retraction Watch Database, we collected retracted articles written by Chinese authors from 31 provinces in mainland China, spanning the period between January 1, 2012, and December 31, 2023. We used Geographical Information Science to analyze spatial distribution characteristics of retracted articles by Chinese authors and identify high-risk clusters of retracted areas.
resultsA total of 14,445 retracted articles authored by researchers from 31 provinces in China between 2012 and 2023 were analyzed. The Spatial trend surface analysis and Gravity center movement indicated a gradual increase in the number of retracted articles from the west to the east. The spatial autocorrelation analysis showed that revealed significant spatial clustering in the distribution of retracted articles across the 31 provinces. The results of the spatial-temporal clustering analysis showed that the hotspots were primarily concentrated in Shandong, Jiangsu, Shanghai, Henan, and Anhui.
conclusionThere is a discernible spatial clustering among these retractions, with a gradual increase in the number of retracted articles from west to east. Shandong, Jiangsu, Shanghai, Henan, and Anhui are the hotspots for 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.