Bibliometric and Altmetric Analysis of Retracted Articles on COVID-19.
COVID-19
Information Technology
Social Media
Journal
Journal of Korean medical science
ISSN: 1598-6357
Titre abrégé: J Korean Med Sci
Pays: Korea (South)
ID NLM: 8703518
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
14 Feb 2022
14 Feb 2022
Historique:
received:
17
09
2021
accepted:
23
12
2021
entrez:
15
2
2022
pubmed:
16
2
2022
medline:
22
2
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
With greater use of social media platforms for promotions of research articles, retracted articles tend to receive approximately the same attention. We systematically analyzed retracted articles from retractionwatch.com to look at the Altmetric Attention Scores (AAS) garnered over a period of time in order to highlight the role of social media and other platforms in advertising retracted articles and its effect on the spread of misinformation. Retractionwatch.com was searched for coronavirus disease 2019 related retracted papers on November 6th, 2021. Articles were excluded based on lack of digital object identifier (DOI), if they were preprint articles, absent AAS, and incomplete AAS of pre retraction, post retraction, or both scores. A total of 196 articles were found on the Retraction Watch website of which 189 were retracted papers and 7 were expression of concern (EOC). We then identified 175 articles after excluding those that did not have a DOI and 30 preprint articles were also excluded giving 145 articles. Further exclusion of articles with absent AAS and incomplete AAS resulted in a total of 22 articles. Retracted articles receive significant online attention. Twitter and Mendeley were the most popular medium for publicizing retracted articles, therefore more focus should be given by journals and their Twitter accounts to discredit all their retracted articles. Preprints should be reconsidered as a whole by journals due to the huge risk they carry in disseminating false information.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
With greater use of social media platforms for promotions of research articles, retracted articles tend to receive approximately the same attention. We systematically analyzed retracted articles from retractionwatch.com to look at the Altmetric Attention Scores (AAS) garnered over a period of time in order to highlight the role of social media and other platforms in advertising retracted articles and its effect on the spread of misinformation.
METHODS
METHODS
Retractionwatch.com was searched for coronavirus disease 2019 related retracted papers on November 6th, 2021. Articles were excluded based on lack of digital object identifier (DOI), if they were preprint articles, absent AAS, and incomplete AAS of pre retraction, post retraction, or both scores.
RESULTS
RESULTS
A total of 196 articles were found on the Retraction Watch website of which 189 were retracted papers and 7 were expression of concern (EOC). We then identified 175 articles after excluding those that did not have a DOI and 30 preprint articles were also excluded giving 145 articles. Further exclusion of articles with absent AAS and incomplete AAS resulted in a total of 22 articles.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
Retracted articles receive significant online attention. Twitter and Mendeley were the most popular medium for publicizing retracted articles, therefore more focus should be given by journals and their Twitter accounts to discredit all their retracted articles. Preprints should be reconsidered as a whole by journals due to the huge risk they carry in disseminating false information.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35166080
pii: 37.e44
doi: 10.3346/jkms.2022.37.e44
pmc: PMC8845104
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e44Informations de copyright
© 2022 The Korean Academy of Medical Sciences.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors have no potential conflicts of interest to disclose.
Références
Nature. 2020 Jun;582(7811):230-233
pubmed: 32499650
Front Public Health. 2021 Mar 18;9:610623
pubmed: 33816415
Clin Neurol Neurosurg. 2019 May;180:97-100
pubmed: 30953974
BMJ Glob Health. 2020 May;5(5):
pubmed: 32409327
Environ Microbiol. 2021 Jun;23(6):2878-2890
pubmed: 33928745
Reumatologia. 2021;59(2):68-72
pubmed: 33976459
Mediterr J Rheumatol. 2020 Sep 08;31(Suppl 2):243-246
pubmed: 33195999
BMJ Open. 2016 Nov 23;6(11):e012047
pubmed: 27881524
PLoS Biol. 2021 Apr 2;19(4):e3000959
pubmed: 33798194
Rheumatol Int. 2020 Feb;40(2):183-190
pubmed: 31863133
J Taibah Univ Med Sci. 2021 May 29;16(4):477-481
pubmed: 34408603
Stud Health Technol Inform. 2013;183:244-8
pubmed: 23388291
J Korean Med Sci. 2021 May 17;36(19):e126
pubmed: 34002546
EMBO Rep. 2020 Jun 4;21(6):e50817
pubmed: 32496027
Mem Cognit. 2021 May;49(4):631-644
pubmed: 33452666
JMIR Med Educ. 2016 Sep 12;2(2):e15
pubmed: 27731855
Scientometrics. 2020;125(1):819-822
pubmed: 32836531
NPJ Digit Med. 2018;1:
pubmed: 30854472
J Clin Rheumatol. 2020 Sep;26(6):220-223
pubmed: 32852927
J Korean Med Sci. 2020 Jul 13;35(27):e256
pubmed: 32657090
P T. 2014 Jul;39(7):491-520
pubmed: 25083128
J Prim Care Community Health. 2021 Jan-Dec;12:21501327211015592
pubmed: 33949228
Sci Rep. 2021 Mar 23;11(1):6626
pubmed: 33758218
J Korean Med Sci. 2021 Jun 07;36(22):e162
pubmed: 34100565
PLoS One. 2019 Mar 19;14(3):e0212263
pubmed: 30889186
Vaccine. 2022 Jan 3;40(1):43-51
pubmed: 34857421
Diabetes Metab Syndr. 2021 Jul-Aug;15(4):102140
pubmed: 34186371
J Med Internet Res. 2014 Jan 14;16(1):e8
pubmed: 24425670
BMJ Glob Health. 2020 Nov;5(11):
pubmed: 33187964
PLoS One. 2021 May 12;16(5):e0248625
pubmed: 33979339
Cureus. 2020 Mar 13;12(3):e7255
pubmed: 32292669
Rheumatol Int. 2020 Nov;40(11):1865-1872
pubmed: 32920728