Rapid publication during crises: Analyzing retractions during the Covid-19 pandemic

Abstract

The Covid-19 pandemic triggered a surge in scientific publications, accompanied by an increase in retractions and related corrective actions. This study systematically reviews retracted, withdrawn, or corrected Covid-19-related articles from the first wave and explores their causes and impacts. We searched Web of Science, PubMed, Scopus, Science Direct, Retraction Watch, and MedRxiv/BioRxiv for Covid-19-related articles retracted, withdrawn, or marked with an expression of concern between December 2019 and June 2020. Article characteristics, retraction authorities, and reasons were extracted and categorized using a structured framework based on prior literature and investigator consensus. Twenty-eight articles met the inclusion criteria: 23 were fully retracted (or removed if preprints), three were temporarily retracted, and two bore expressions of concern. The United States and China were the most common countries of first author affiliation, and 32% of the articles were preprints. The mean duration online before corrective action was 20 days. Collectively, these articles accrued over 1,900 citations and were referenced in major policy documents, including those from the World Health Organization and the Centers for Disease Control, even after retraction. The most frequent reasons for retraction or correction included questionable methodology, data integrity concerns, and misleading interpretation. Rapid publishing during health crises poses significant challenges, including risks associated with preprints, delayed corrective actions, and continued citation of retracted work. Rigorous peer review, transparent reporting, and adherence to ethical standards are essential to maintain scientific integrity during emergencies.

Ähnliche Arbeiten