ArticleJournal of Korean medical science2026
Retracted Publications Related to Statistics: A Scopus-Based Bibliometric Analysis.
Article in Journal of Korean medical science, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Artificial intelligence in rheumatology: 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundStatistics is a field that provides the methodological basis for modern scientific research, including data collection, analysis, and interpretation. The retraction procedure involves the official removal of a work from the literature due to substantial scientific concerns. Analysis of retracted publications is critical for identifying ethical violations and structural flaws in scientific publishing.
methodsThis study performed a bibliometric and descriptive analysis of publications labeled as "retracted" in the Scopus database, retrieved via a search utilizing the term "statistics" on August 18, 2025. The analysis of documents was conducted based on year, country, journal, keyword, and reasons for retraction. Collaboration networks of countries and authors were displayed with VOSviewer software, and reasons for retraction were confirmed using the Retraction Watch Database. Temporal trends were assessed by linear regression analysis.
resultsA total of 680 retracted papers were examined. Retractions occurred between 2006 and 2025. A statistically significant upward trend was found in the number of retracted articles over time (
conclusionThe number of retracted publications tagged with the keyword "statistics" has increased significantly over the years. This increase can be attributed to strengthening scientific oversight mechanisms and increased awareness of publication ethics. Increasing the involvement of statistical experts in the peer-review process, improving the statistical literacy of authors, and developing training and mentoring mechanisms to prevent ethical violations are crucial.
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.