ArticleFEBS letters2025
RETRACTION: Sialic Acids Acquired by Pseudomonas aeruginosa Are Involved in Reduced Complement Deposition and Siglec Mediated Host-Cell Recognition.
Article in FEBS letters, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Retraction of
Authors and funding
0 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
retractionB. Khatua, A. Ghoshal, K. Bhattacharya, C. Mandal, B. Saha, P.R. Crocker, and C. Mandal, "Sialic Acids Acquired by Pseudomonas Aeruginosa Are Involved in Reduced Complement Deposition and Siglec Mediated Host-Cell Recognition," FEBS Letters 584, no. 3 (2010): 555-561, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.febslet.2009.11.087. The above article, published online on 27 November 2009 in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com), has been retracted by agreement between the journal Editor-in-Chief, Michael Brunner; the Federation of European Biochemical Societies; and John Wiley & Sons Ltd. UK. The retraction has been agreed due to concerns raised by a third party. Further investigation revealed the unattributed duplication of nearly all of the data presented in Figures 1 and 2 from Figures 2 and 3 from a now-retracted article by the same authors (DOI: 10.1128/IAI.01083-08). In addition, there is duplication of data within the MALDI-TOF-MS data in Figure 3b and within the flow cytometry-based binding assay data in Figure 5. These concerns undermine the journal's confidence in the results and conclusions presented. Therefore, the parties agree that the article must be retracted.
Identifiers
40426017What 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.