Mistakes and misconduct in the research literature: retractions just the tip of the iceberg

Poulton, Alison

doi:10.5694/j.1326-5377.2007.tb00917.x

Topics

Statistics, epidemiology and research design

To the Editor: Post-publication audits of the quality of medical research studies are vitally important. I support the conjecture of Nath et al1 that the small number of retractions for mistakes and misconduct (about 20 per year for articles published between 1982 and 2002) represents the tip of the iceberg.

Nepean Clinical School, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW.

Correspondence: sallypoulton@westnet.com.au

1. Nath SB, Marcus SC, Druss BG. Retractions in the research literature: misconduct or mistakes? Med J Aust 2006; 185: 152-154. <MJA full text>
2. Poulton A. Growth on stimulant medication; clarifying the confusion: a review. Arch Dis Child 2005; 90: 801-806.
3. Poulton A. Growth and sexual maturation in children and adolescents with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Curr Opin Pediatr 2006; 18: 427-434.

Online responses are no longer available. Please refer to our instructions for authors page for more information.