Lack of involvement of medical writers and the pharmaceutical industry in publications retracted for misconduct: a systematic, controlled, retrospective study

AbstractObjectives:The primary objective of this study was to quantify how many publications retracted because of misconduct involved declared medical writers (i.e., not ghostwriters) or declared pharmaceutical industry support. The secondary objective was to investigate factors associated with misconduct retractions.Design:A systematic, controlled, retrospective, bibliometric study.Data source:Retracted publications dataset in the MEDLINE database.Data selection:PubMed was searched (Limits: English, human, January 1966 – February 2008) to identify publications retracted because of misconduct. Publications retracted because of mistake served as the control group. Standardized definitions and data collection tools were used, and data were analyzed by an independent academic statistician.Results:Of the 463 retracted publications retrieved, 213 (46%) were retracted because of misconduct. Publications retracted because of misconduct rarely involved declared medical writers (3/213; 1.4%) or declared pharmaceut...