ArticleRadiologie (Heidelberg, Germany)2025
Examining retracted papers in the "Radiology, Nuclear Medicine, and Medical Imaging" category in the Web of Science database.
Article in Radiologie (Heidelberg, Germany), 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
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveWe conducted a comprehensive analysis to address the limited knowledge regarding retracted articles in the field of radiology, nuclear medicine, and medical imaging within the Web of Science (WoS) database. MATERIALS AND
methodsThe category "Radiology, Nuclear Medicine, and Medical Imaging" was selected in the WoS search interface without specifying a time range and with document types limited to "retraction, retracted publication, withdrawn publication." A total of 113 retracted articles were retrieved and analytically categorized into subgroups for examination. Two independent researchers evaluated the reasons for retraction.
resultsOf the 113 articles identified as retracted, 106 were included in the study. The median publication duration prior to retraction was 183 days (range: 1-16,406 days). The highest retraction rate by country was found in China (55.66%), and by journal category, in the Science Citation Index (SCI) and SCI-Expanded (86.79%). The primary reasons for retraction were concerns and errors related to the data (37 articles), plagiarism (33 articles), and ethical issues (13 articles). In terms of sources, 66 retractions were initiated by the publisher/editor, 25 by the author, and 13 jointly by the author and editor.
conclusionThe findings of our study emphasize the need for increased transparency, ethical oversight, and data accuracy in academic publishing. Implementing such measures is essential to safeguarding the credibility and validity of scientific research and ensuring more reliable progress in the academic community moving forward.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41160197What 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.