ArticleJournal of Korean medical science2025
Analysis of Retracted Publications on Methotrexate.
Article in Journal of Korean medical science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Retractions in the field of pregnancy and pain: bibliometric characteristics, reasons, and trends.Rheumatology international · 2026Article
- Handgrip strength as a valuable multidimensional clinical parameter: a cross-sectional Scopus-based analysis.Rheumatology international · 2026Article
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
backgroundMethotrexate (MTX) is a frequently used antifolate agent in rheumatology, oncology, and dermatology. Retractions are crucial for preserving scientific integrity by fixing the literature when errors, ethical violations, or data falsification are detected. This study seeks to comprehensively examine retracted MTX publications, detecting trends, reasons, and potential ramifications.
methodsA descriptive cross-sectional study was performed by searching PubMed for retracted MTX publications without temporal constraints. Bibliometric data were retrieved, encompassing publication details, journal indexing, citation metrics, and Altmetric Attention Scores (AAS). Reasons for retraction were categorized.
resultsThirty-six retracted papers were identified. The predominant cause for retraction encompassed data concerns (n = 15), fraudulent activity (n = 11), and manipulation of the peer review process (n = 10). China recorded the most retractions (n = 14), followed by the USA (n = 6) and Egypt (n = 3). The median period until retraction was 712 (91-9,893) days. Most retracted articles were published in non-rheumatology journals. Citation analysis showed a median of 5 (0-105) citations. Additionally, the median AAS was 1 (0-14).
conclusionData integrity concerns, fraudulent activities, and manipulation of peer review processes constitute major obstacles in MTX-related research. The considerable number of retractions in certain countries underscores the need to promote research ethics and measures to protect scientific integrity. Enhancing peer review, implementing more intense data transparency, and promoting post-publication evaluation are essential measures to protect scientific integrity and uphold confidence in clinical recommendations.
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.