An analysis of retracted studies in cardiology in the last two decades
Creators: name: Sharma, Akash
name: Karavadi, Vidusha
name: Suresh, Harshini
name: Balasubramanian, Sowntappan
name: Singh, Priyali
name: Walia, Parteek
name: Venkatesh, U
Publisher: name: Taylor & Francis
Year: 2024
Subjects: subject: Medicine
subject: Sociology
subject: FOS: Sociology
subject: Developmental Biology
subject: Science Policy

description: <b>Background:</b> The aim of this study is to analyze retracted studies in cardiovascular field. <b>Methodology:</b> PubMed and Embase databases were used to identify retracted publications from 2002 to 2022. Various characteristics of articles were retrieved, and an analysis was performed using R software. <b>Results:</b> We finally included 979 articles. Authors from China have the highest number of retracted studies (35.5%), followed by the USA (22.1%), and Japan (4%). The most common causes of retraction are mistakes and honest errors (24.5%) and duplicate data (17.7%). From 2002 to 2022, there has been a significant increase in retracted studies and a decrease in the impact factor of journals, number of citations, and time to retraction. <b>Conclusion:</b> The trend of retracting publications in cardiology is increasing. Retracted publications are withdrawn publications. Recently, the number of retracted publications has increased. In our research, we try to find the characteristics and pattern of the retracted studies in heart published studies. PubMed and Embase databases were used to identify retracted publications from 2002 to 2022. Various characteristics of articles were retrieved, and statistical software was used to analyze them. We finally included 979 articles. Findings from our research showed authors from China, the USA, and Japan have the highest number of retracted studies. Honest errors, duplicate data, and fabricated data are common causes of retractions. From 2002 to 2022, there has been an increase in the number of retracted studies and a decrease in the impact factor of journals, the number of citations, and the time to retraction. We also compared the results between the first (2003–2012) and the second decade (SD; 2013–2022). In the SD, there are more retracted publications. We saw that in the first decade, the USA had more retractions; however, in the SD, China had more retractions. The retracted publications in the SD have less time to retract and fewer citations. There is no change regarding the funding of research or the parties' interest in conducting research. In the end, the trend of retracting publications in heart studies is increasing. Making the scientific world aware would be the most important to tackle this problem. In our study, we included 979 retracted articles, analyzed trends, and also divided our analysis into the first decade for the years 2003–2012 and the second decade (SD) for the years 2013–2022. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs), experimental studies, and case-control studies are the most common study designs that are retracted. Authors from China, the USA, Japan, and Germany have the highest retractions. Regarding the causes, honest errors (24.5%), duplicate data (17.7%), and fabricated data (16.9%) are the commonest causes of retraction. Plagiarism consists of 12.3% retraction causes. In our trend analysis, we saw a significant increase in the number of retracted studies and the availability of full texts. However, there is a significant decrease in the citations and time to retraction. During the first decade, the USA had more retractions, while in the SD, China had more retractions. In the SD, the retracted publications have an average of 96 fewer citations, have 9 months less time to retractions, and are published in low-impact factor journals. Retraction is still a problem in cardiology, and recently, there has been an increase in the number of cardiology retracted papers. Also, RCTs, which are commonly used in generating evidence and forming guidelines, are the most common type of studies that are retracted. The cardiology world needs a multimodal approach to tackle this problem. However, the most important is making scientists aware and preventing research misconduct.