Retractions and post-retraction citations in the COVID-19 infodemic: is Academia spreading misinformation?
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2021 |
Outros Autores: | , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Liinc em Revista |
Texto Completo: | http://revista.ibict.br/liinc/article/view/5593 |
Resumo: | The speed in producing information and the rush to publish scientific articles on COVID-19 in several knowledge areas have resulted in what is known as an infodemic also in the scientific field, potentially producing inaccurate information and sources of misinformation at scholarly communication. This has led to some articles being retracted or withdrawn due to unintentional errors or deliberate misconduct, but they continue to be cited. This article (i) gives an overview of the COVID-19 retracted articles and preprints, and (ii) analyses a set of post-retraction citations in the context of the COVID-19 infodemic. We analyzed 56 retracted articles and preprints by using the list available in the section on “retracted coronavirus (COVID-19) papers” in the Retraction Watch (RW) webpage. We found that 64.3% of these retractions were articles published in journals, 33.9% were uploaded in preprints servers, and 1.8% conference papers. We also analyzed 162 eligible articles out of 612 records identified by using the Google Scholar search engine. This research found that an article from The Lancet continued to be cited even after being retracted. In this case, we identified 214 post-retraction citations, of which 38% were negative (n=81), 32% were neutral (n=69), and 30% were positive citations (n=64) |
id |
IBICT-2_cbbcae6d95c0d8c3e9c6c1ebecf9e2c7 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:ojs.revista.ibict.br:article/5593 |
network_acronym_str |
IBICT-2 |
network_name_str |
Liinc em Revista |
spelling |
Retractions and post-retraction citations in the COVID-19 infodemic: is Academia spreading misinformation?Retratações e citações pós-retratação na infodemia de COVID-19: a Academia está espalhando desinformação?Retracted articlesRetracted preprintsCOVID-19MisinformationInfodemicPost-retraction citationsThe speed in producing information and the rush to publish scientific articles on COVID-19 in several knowledge areas have resulted in what is known as an infodemic also in the scientific field, potentially producing inaccurate information and sources of misinformation at scholarly communication. This has led to some articles being retracted or withdrawn due to unintentional errors or deliberate misconduct, but they continue to be cited. This article (i) gives an overview of the COVID-19 retracted articles and preprints, and (ii) analyses a set of post-retraction citations in the context of the COVID-19 infodemic. We analyzed 56 retracted articles and preprints by using the list available in the section on “retracted coronavirus (COVID-19) papers” in the Retraction Watch (RW) webpage. We found that 64.3% of these retractions were articles published in journals, 33.9% were uploaded in preprints servers, and 1.8% conference papers. We also analyzed 162 eligible articles out of 612 records identified by using the Google Scholar search engine. This research found that an article from The Lancet continued to be cited even after being retracted. In this case, we identified 214 post-retraction citations, of which 38% were negative (n=81), 32% were neutral (n=69), and 30% were positive citations (n=64)A velocidade da produção de informações e a pressa em publicar artigos científicos sobre a COVID-19 em diversas áreas do conhecimento resultaram no que se denomina infodemia também no campo científico, potencialmente produzindo informações imprecisas e fontes de desinformação na comunicação científica. Isso fez com que alguns artigos fossem retratados ou despublicados devido a erros não intencionais ou má conduta deliberada, mas eles continuam sendo citados. Este artigo (i) oferece uma visão geral dos artigos e preprints retratados no âmbito da pesquisa sobre COVID-19 e (ii) analisa um conjunto de citações pós-retratação no contexto da infodemia da COVID-19. Foram analisados 56 artigos e preprints retratados utilizando a lista disponível na seção “artigos sobre coronavírus retratados (COVID-19)” na página Retraction Watch (RW). Encontrou-se que 64,3% dessas retratações se referem a artigos publicados em periódicos, 33,9% foram carregadas em servidores de preprints e 1,8% artigos de conferência. Também foram analisados 162 artigos elegíveis dos 612 registros identificados usando o mecanismo de busca do Google Scholar. A pesquisa constatou que um artigo do The Lancet continuou a ser citado mesmo após a retratação. Nesse caso, foram identificadas 214 citações pós-retratação, sendo 38% negativas (n= 81), 32% neutras (n= 69) e 30% positivas (n= 64)Instituto Brasileiro de Informação em Ciência e Tecnologia (Ibict)2021-05-21info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttp://revista.ibict.br/liinc/article/view/559310.18617/liinc.v17i1.5593Liinc em Revista; Vol. 17 No. 1 (2021): Infodemic and Our Future; e5593Liinc em Revista; Vol. 17 Núm. 1 (2021): Infodemia e o Nosso Futuro; e5593Liinc em Revista; v. 17 n. 1 (2021): Infodemia e o Nosso Futuro; e55931808-3536reponame:Liinc em Revistainstname:Instituto Brasileiro de Informação Ciência e Tecnologia (IBICT)instacron:IBICTenghttp://revista.ibict.br/liinc/article/view/5593/5265Todos os direitos (c) 2021 Karen Santos-d'Amorim, Rinaldo Ribeiro de Melo, Raimundo Nonato Macedo dos Santoshttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess Santos-d'Amorim, Karen Ribeiro de Melo, RinaldoNonato Macedo dos Santos, Raimundo2021-05-27T11:34:14Zoai:ojs.revista.ibict.br:article/5593Revistahttp://revista.ibict.br/liincPUBhttp://revista.ibict.br/liinc/oai1808-35361808-3536opendoar:null2021-05-27 11:34:15.832Liinc em Revista - Instituto Brasileiro de Informação Ciência e Tecnologia (IBICT)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Retractions and post-retraction citations in the COVID-19 infodemic: is Academia spreading misinformation? Retratações e citações pós-retratação na infodemia de COVID-19: a Academia está espalhando desinformação? |
title |
Retractions and post-retraction citations in the COVID-19 infodemic: is Academia spreading misinformation? |
spellingShingle |
Retractions and post-retraction citations in the COVID-19 infodemic: is Academia spreading misinformation? Santos-d'Amorim, Karen Retracted articles Retracted preprints COVID-19 Misinformation Infodemic Post-retraction citations |
title_short |
Retractions and post-retraction citations in the COVID-19 infodemic: is Academia spreading misinformation? |
title_full |
Retractions and post-retraction citations in the COVID-19 infodemic: is Academia spreading misinformation? |
title_fullStr |
Retractions and post-retraction citations in the COVID-19 infodemic: is Academia spreading misinformation? |
title_full_unstemmed |
Retractions and post-retraction citations in the COVID-19 infodemic: is Academia spreading misinformation? |
title_sort |
Retractions and post-retraction citations in the COVID-19 infodemic: is Academia spreading misinformation? |
author |
Santos-d'Amorim, Karen |
author_facet |
Santos-d'Amorim, Karen Ribeiro de Melo, Rinaldo Nonato Macedo dos Santos, Raimundo |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Ribeiro de Melo, Rinaldo Nonato Macedo dos Santos, Raimundo |
author2_role |
author author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Santos-d'Amorim, Karen Ribeiro de Melo, Rinaldo Nonato Macedo dos Santos, Raimundo |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Retracted articles Retracted preprints COVID-19 Misinformation Infodemic Post-retraction citations |
topic |
Retracted articles Retracted preprints COVID-19 Misinformation Infodemic Post-retraction citations |
dc.description.none.fl_txt_mv |
The speed in producing information and the rush to publish scientific articles on COVID-19 in several knowledge areas have resulted in what is known as an infodemic also in the scientific field, potentially producing inaccurate information and sources of misinformation at scholarly communication. This has led to some articles being retracted or withdrawn due to unintentional errors or deliberate misconduct, but they continue to be cited. This article (i) gives an overview of the COVID-19 retracted articles and preprints, and (ii) analyses a set of post-retraction citations in the context of the COVID-19 infodemic. We analyzed 56 retracted articles and preprints by using the list available in the section on “retracted coronavirus (COVID-19) papers” in the Retraction Watch (RW) webpage. We found that 64.3% of these retractions were articles published in journals, 33.9% were uploaded in preprints servers, and 1.8% conference papers. We also analyzed 162 eligible articles out of 612 records identified by using the Google Scholar search engine. This research found that an article from The Lancet continued to be cited even after being retracted. In this case, we identified 214 post-retraction citations, of which 38% were negative (n=81), 32% were neutral (n=69), and 30% were positive citations (n=64) A velocidade da produção de informações e a pressa em publicar artigos científicos sobre a COVID-19 em diversas áreas do conhecimento resultaram no que se denomina infodemia também no campo científico, potencialmente produzindo informações imprecisas e fontes de desinformação na comunicação científica. Isso fez com que alguns artigos fossem retratados ou despublicados devido a erros não intencionais ou má conduta deliberada, mas eles continuam sendo citados. Este artigo (i) oferece uma visão geral dos artigos e preprints retratados no âmbito da pesquisa sobre COVID-19 e (ii) analisa um conjunto de citações pós-retratação no contexto da infodemia da COVID-19. Foram analisados 56 artigos e preprints retratados utilizando a lista disponível na seção “artigos sobre coronavírus retratados (COVID-19)” na página Retraction Watch (RW). Encontrou-se que 64,3% dessas retratações se referem a artigos publicados em periódicos, 33,9% foram carregadas em servidores de preprints e 1,8% artigos de conferência. Também foram analisados 162 artigos elegíveis dos 612 registros identificados usando o mecanismo de busca do Google Scholar. A pesquisa constatou que um artigo do The Lancet continuou a ser citado mesmo após a retratação. Nesse caso, foram identificadas 214 citações pós-retratação, sendo 38% negativas (n= 81), 32% neutras (n= 69) e 30% positivas (n= 64) |
description |
The speed in producing information and the rush to publish scientific articles on COVID-19 in several knowledge areas have resulted in what is known as an infodemic also in the scientific field, potentially producing inaccurate information and sources of misinformation at scholarly communication. This has led to some articles being retracted or withdrawn due to unintentional errors or deliberate misconduct, but they continue to be cited. This article (i) gives an overview of the COVID-19 retracted articles and preprints, and (ii) analyses a set of post-retraction citations in the context of the COVID-19 infodemic. We analyzed 56 retracted articles and preprints by using the list available in the section on “retracted coronavirus (COVID-19) papers” in the Retraction Watch (RW) webpage. We found that 64.3% of these retractions were articles published in journals, 33.9% were uploaded in preprints servers, and 1.8% conference papers. We also analyzed 162 eligible articles out of 612 records identified by using the Google Scholar search engine. This research found that an article from The Lancet continued to be cited even after being retracted. In this case, we identified 214 post-retraction citations, of which 38% were negative (n=81), 32% were neutral (n=69), and 30% were positive citations (n=64) |
publishDate |
2021 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2021-05-21 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
http://revista.ibict.br/liinc/article/view/5593 10.18617/liinc.v17i1.5593 |
url |
http://revista.ibict.br/liinc/article/view/5593 |
identifier_str_mv |
10.18617/liinc.v17i1.5593 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
http://revista.ibict.br/liinc/article/view/5593/5265 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
Todos os direitos (c) 2021 Karen Santos-d'Amorim, Rinaldo Ribeiro de Melo, Raimundo Nonato Macedo dos Santos https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
rights_invalid_str_mv |
Todos os direitos (c) 2021 Karen Santos-d'Amorim, Rinaldo Ribeiro de Melo, Raimundo Nonato Macedo dos Santos https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Instituto Brasileiro de Informação em Ciência e Tecnologia (Ibict) |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Instituto Brasileiro de Informação em Ciência e Tecnologia (Ibict) |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Liinc em Revista; Vol. 17 No. 1 (2021): Infodemic and Our Future; e5593 Liinc em Revista; Vol. 17 Núm. 1 (2021): Infodemia e o Nosso Futuro; e5593 Liinc em Revista; v. 17 n. 1 (2021): Infodemia e o Nosso Futuro; e5593 1808-3536 reponame:Liinc em Revista instname:Instituto Brasileiro de Informação Ciência e Tecnologia (IBICT) instacron:IBICT |
reponame_str |
Liinc em Revista |
collection |
Liinc em Revista |
instname_str |
Instituto Brasileiro de Informação Ciência e Tecnologia (IBICT) |
instacron_str |
IBICT |
institution |
IBICT |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Liinc em Revista - Instituto Brasileiro de Informação Ciência e Tecnologia (IBICT) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
|
subject_por_txtF_mv |
Retracted articles Retracted preprints COVID-19 Misinformation Infodemic Post-retraction citations |
_version_ |
1700924326700646400 |