The thin ret(raction) line: biomedical journal responses to incorrect non-targeting nucleotide sequence reagents in human gene knockdown publications

Jennifer A. Byrne (), Yasunori Park, Rachael A. West, Amanda Capes-Davis, Bertrand Favier, Guillaume Cabanac and Cyril Labbé
Additional contact information
Jennifer A. Byrne: New South Wales Health Statewide Biobank, New South Wales Health Pathology
Yasunori Park: The University of Sydney
Rachael A. West: The University of Sydney
Amanda Capes-Davis: The University of Sydney
Bertrand Favier: University Grenoble Alpes, Team GREPI, Etablissement Français du Sang
Guillaume Cabanac: University of Toulouse
Cyril Labbé: University Grenoble Alpes, CNRS, Grenoble INP, LIG

Scientometrics, 2021, vol. 126, issue 4, No 35, 3513-3534

Abstract: Abstract The capacity of the scientific literature to self-correct is of vital importance, but few studies have compared post-publication journal responses to specific error types. We have compared journal responses to a specific reagent error in 31 human gene knockdown publications, namely a non-targeting or negative control nucleotide sequence that is instead predicted to target a human gene. The 31 papers published by 13 biomedical journals generated 26 published responses (14 retractions, 5 expressions of concern, 7 author corrections which included one resolved expression of concern) as well as 6 stated decisions to take no action. Variations in published responses were noted both between journals and by 4 journals that published different responses to at least 2 papers. A subset of published responses revealed conflicting explanations for the wrongly identified control reagent, despite 30/31 papers obtaining their gene knockdown reagents from the same external supplier. Viewed collectively, different journal responses to human gene knockdown publications with a common reagent error type suggest that editorial staff require more support to interpret post-publication notifications of incorrect nucleotide sequence reagents. We propose a draft template to facilitate the communication, interpretation and investigation of published errors, including errors affecting research reagents.

Keywords: Correction; Experimental reagent; Expression of concern; Gene knockdown; Nucleotide sequence; Retraction (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2021
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-021-03871-9 Abstract (text/html)
Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

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:spr:scient:v:126:y:2021:i:4:d:10.1007_s11192-021-03871-9

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer.com/economics/journal/11192

DOI: 10.1007/s11192-021-03871-9

Access Statistics for this article

Scientometrics is currently edited by Wolfgang Glänzel

More articles in Scientometrics from Springer, Akadémiai Kiadó
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().