An investigation into the impact and implications of published papers from retracted research: systematic search of affected literature

What is it about?

We examined whether reports of 12 clinical trials on osteoporotic fracture prevention from Japan, which were retracted as a result of research misconduct, had an impact on guidance, reviews and clinical trials. We found 13 guidelines, systematic or other reviews would likely change their findings if the affected trial reports were removed, and in another eight it was unclear if findings would change. Only one of the 68 citing publications, a systematic review, appeared to have undertaken a reassessment, which led to a correction.

We found evidence that the 12 clinical trial reports distorted the evidence base. Correction of these distortions is slow, uncoordinated and inconsistent. Unless there is a rapid, systematic, coordinated approach by databases, authors, journals and publishers to mitigate the impact of known cases of research misconduct, patients, other researchers and their funders may continue to be adversely affected.


Featured Image