Gasparyan AY, Ayvazyan L, Akazhanov NA, et al. Self-correction in biomedical publications and the scientific impact. Croatian Medical Journal 2014;55:61-72
(doi: 10.3325/cmj.2014.55.61)
The authors conducted searches through PubMed, based on the author information, to retrieve errata, duplicate, and retracted publications. A striking increase in the number of corrections appeared in 2013. Duplicate and retracted article types were those most frequently recorded, and a sizeable amount of them came from highly productive countries. In particular, findings revealed an increase of duplicate items, which mostly came to the light in the digitization and open-access era. The study suggests that the increased self-correction in biomedicine is due to the attention of readers and authors, who spot errors.
http://www.biomedsearch.com/nih/Self-correction-in-biomedical-publications/24577829.html
(doi: 10.3325/cmj.2014.55.61)
The authors conducted searches through PubMed, based on the author information, to retrieve errata, duplicate, and retracted publications. A striking increase in the number of corrections appeared in 2013. Duplicate and retracted article types were those most frequently recorded, and a sizeable amount of them came from highly productive countries. In particular, findings revealed an increase of duplicate items, which mostly came to the light in the digitization and open-access era. The study suggests that the increased self-correction in biomedicine is due to the attention of readers and authors, who spot errors.
http://www.biomedsearch.com/nih/Self-correction-in-biomedical-publications/24577829.html
Comments