Sharing of retracted COVID-19 articles: an altmetric study

Abstract

Objective: This study examines the extent to which retracted articles pertaining to COVID-19 have been shared via social and mass media based on altmetric scores. Methods: Seventy-one retracted articles related to COVID-19 were identified from relevant databases, of which thirty-nine had an Altmetric Attention Score obtained using the Altmetrics Bookmarklet. Data extracted from the articles include overall attention score and demographics of sharers (e.g., geographic location, professional affiliation). Results: Retracted articles related to COVID-19 were shared tens of thousands of times to an audience of potentially hundreds of millions of readers and followers. Twitter was the largest medium for sharing these articles, and the United States was the country with the most sharers. While general members of the public were the largest proportion of sharers, researchers and professionals were not immune to sharing these articles on social media and on websites, blogs, or news media. Conclusions: These findings have potential implications for better understanding the spread of misleading or false information perpetuated in retracted scholarly publications. They emphasize the importance of quality peer review and research ethics among journals and responsibility among individuals who wish to share research findings.

Diabetes Research and Resource Sharing During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Systematic Review and Experience from an Academic/Non-Profit Resource Website

“…From February 2020 to January 2022, an average of 137 scientific articles about COVID-19 were published per day in PubMed. 23 Top journals received a record number of articles; for example, the New England Journal of Medicine reported receiving up to 40 COVID-19-related publications per day, and the editor of the Journal of American Medical Association reported receiving up to 235 COVID-19-related articles or submissions per day. 24 The thoroughness of the peer review process put an immense strain on reviewers for a quick turnaround.…”

“…This is a problem because many of these articles continue to be shared after retraction. 23 For example, platforms such as Twitter and news outlets may continue to share retracted articles, which have tangible impacts on clinical decision-making and public health guidelines. 25…”

“…This is a problem because many of these articles continue to be shared after retraction. 23 For example, platforms such as Twitter and news outlets may continue to share retracted articles, which have tangible impacts on clinical decision-making and public health guidelines. 25 To publish their information quickly, many researchers turned to preprint servers, websites that allow readers to access articles that are not yet peer-reviewed, such as SSRN and MedRxiv.…”

Characteristics of correction practice and its citation in library and information science journals

“…In recent years, with the occurrence of large-scale retractions, scholars have begun to care about the retraction practice of published papers. They focused on the characteristics of retracted papers (Bar-Ilan and Halevi, 2018; Lievore et al, 2021), the reasons for retractions (Zhang et al, 2020), and the scientific impact of retracted papers (da Silva and Bornemann-Cimenti, 2017; Shamsi et al, 2022). However, correction practice has received less attention.…”

“…There are various reasons for retraction, including scientific misconduct, error and unreliable results, authorship issues and so on. (Shamsi et al, 2022; Zhang et al, 2020).…”