Analyzing the Drivers Behind Retractions in Tuberculosis Research

Franko O. Garcia-Solorzano (), Shirley M. De la Cruz Anticona, Mario Pezua-Espinoza, Fernando A. Chuquispuma Jesus, Karen D. Sanabria-Pinilla, Christopher Chavez Veliz, Vladimir A. Huayta-Alarcón, Percy Mayta-Tristan and Leonid Lecca
Additional contact information
Franko O. Garcia-Solorzano: Research Group on Bioethics and Scientific Integrity, Universidad Científica del Sur, Lima 15067, Peru
Shirley M. De la Cruz Anticona: Faculty of Health Sciences, Universidad Científica del Sur, Lima 15067, Peru
Mario Pezua-Espinoza: Faculty of Health Sciences, Universidad Científica del Sur, Lima 15067, Peru
Fernando A. Chuquispuma Jesus: Faculty of Health Sciences, Universidad Científica del Sur, Lima 15067, Peru
Karen D. Sanabria-Pinilla: Department of Outpatient and Inpatient Care, Hospital de Emergencias Villa El Salvador, Lima 15837, Peru
Christopher Chavez Veliz: Faculty of Health Sciences, Universidad Científica del Sur, Lima 15067, Peru
Vladimir A. Huayta-Alarcón: Faculty of Health Sciences, Universidad Científica del Sur, Lima 15067, Peru
Percy Mayta-Tristan: Research Group on Bioethics and Scientific Integrity, Universidad Científica del Sur, Lima 15067, Peru
Leonid Lecca: Partners In Health—Socios En Salud Sucursal, Lima 15046, Peru

Publications, 2025, vol. 13, issue 1, 1-9

Abstract: Tuberculosis research plays a crucial role in understanding and responding to the necessities of people with this disease, yet the integrity of this research is compromised by frequent retractions. Identifying and analyzing the main reasons for retraction of tuberculosis articles is essential for improving research practices and ensuring reliable scientific output. In this study, we conducted an advanced systematic literature review of retracted original articles on Tuberculosis, utilizing databases such as Web of Science, Embase, Scopus, PubMed, LILACS, and the Retraction Watch Database webpage. We found that falsification and plagiarism were the most frequent reasons for retraction, although 16% of the retracted articles did not declare the drivers behind the retraction. Almost half of the retracted studies received external funding, affecting not only those specific studies but future funding opportunities for this research field. Stronger measures of research integrity are needed to prevent misconduct in this vulnerable population.

Keywords: tuberculosis; TB; retraction of publication; retracted; scientific misconduct; falsification; reasons; ethics (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: A2 D83 L82 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2025
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/2304-6775/13/1/4/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/2304-6775/13/1/4/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jpubli:v:13:y:2025:i:1:p:4-:d:1566647

Access Statistics for this article

Publications is currently edited by Ms. Jennifer Zhang

More articles in Publications from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().