Daily newsletter https://xitter.twitterapi.xyz/t.co/T4dNEAd2zy Database https://xitter.twitterapi.xyz/t.co/Wx3LmYCtGk Tips team@retractionwatch.com (better than @ replies) Donate https://xitter.twitterapi.xyz/t.co/qh4sIBw1uU
New York
Joined January 2011
- Tweets38.8K
- Following19
- Followers95.4K
- Likes1
Retraction Watch retweeted
16 months after a young girl died in a gene-editing trial, the study's entry in clinicaltrial. gov has finally been updated to acknowledge the death. The move comes after @NewsfromScience and @retractionwatch.com
revealed the fatality 1/ science.org/content/article/…
Retraction Watch retweeted
In a new editor’s note added to a paper reporting preclinical studies of a gene-editing treatment that resulted in the death of a Chinese girl, Nature has flagged “concerns” that have emerged about the publication.
The move follows a Science and Retraction Watch investigation that revealed the tragedy and raised questions about the paper’s lack of disclosure of safety data and certain funding. scim.ag/4fy2Isv
Retraction Watch retweeted
"The growing retraction rate should be interpreted as a sign of progress. It is, in fact, an argument for more investment in scientific research that is performed carefully and rigorously, and corrected when necessary. But retractions still take too long, and do not happen as often as they should."
- Ms. Kate Travis (@RetractionWatch)
Retraction Watch retweeted
"A number of news outlets have recently reported on data showing that China has overtaken the
U.S. on many measures of scientific prestige and accomplishment. Some of this rise is due to
investment by the Chinese government and real productivity gains. But some of it is also due to
gaming the metrics by which science output is judged."
- Ms. Kate Travis (@RetractionWatch)
Retraction Watch retweeted
🚨 Final call! Join us TOMORROW at 1 PM ET for a deep dive into research misconduct. 🕵️♂️🔍
How can institutions handle allegations with clarity and transparency? Hear from @ivanoransky of @RetractionWatch and @MeaganPhelan from @aaas.
👉 Register now: aaas.zoom.us/webinar/registe…
Retraction Watch retweeted
Yesterday at @peerrevcongress there were a few calls for @C0PE to revise its retraction guidelines. They did, released today. Read about the changes at @RetractionWatch: retractionwatch.com/2025/09/…
Retraction Watch retweeted
Science suffers when its critics are censored.
@ivanoransky of Retraction Watch describes cases where critics have been censored:
Retraction Watch retweeted
Ivan Oransky, co-founder of @RetractionWatch, will explore the complexities of scientific retractions, misconduct, and the importance of transparency in research during his talk Oct. 1, 12:30-1:30pm, in the Hesburgh Library Carey Auditorium.
Read more: library.nd.edu/event/scienti…
ALT The headline "Scientific Integrity and Retractions: A Talk by Ivan Oransky" with date and time below and a photo of Oransky on the right.
Retraction Watch retweeted
"Overall, the findings suggest that the attention scientific articles receive on Twitter may have more to do with human interaction and inclusion of visual content in the tweets, than the significance of or genuine interest towards the research results."
link.springer.com/article/10…
Retraction Watch retweeted
You've sunk my bothorship. emerald.com/insight/content/…
Retraction Watch retweeted
"3 million peer-reviewed papers published every year, multiply those by two-to-three reviewers, times four-to-eight hours per reviewer… that math doesn’t work. Yet we persist in this dreamlike fantasy that somehow peer review is going to ensure quality.” firstprinciples.com/article/…
Retraction Watch retweeted
NEJM has dropped what I called a "really bad policy" and "a way backward with embargoes" last month. Good on @medpagetoday and @AHCJ for bringing attention to this, and on @nejm for reversing itself. healthjournalism.org/blog/20…
Retraction Watch retweeted
Correction: I told @wudanyan this four years ago. Apologies, too many tabs open.
I told @apoorva_nyc this four years ago today. Still true.
“Science is a conversation. Unfortunately people in times of crisis forget that science is a proposition and a conversation and an argument.” nytimes.com/2020/04/14/scien…
Retraction Watch retweeted
I told @apoorva_nyc this four years ago today. Still true.
“Science is a conversation. Unfortunately people in times of crisis forget that science is a proposition and a conversation and an argument.” nytimes.com/2020/04/14/scien…
Retraction Watch retweeted
A podcast with @ivanoransky @retractionwatch and Ed Pentz @CrossrefOrg . They discuss how their partnership opens access to retractions data, and how publishers, authors and readers can use the data. ow.ly/qkWm50R2kML
#Retractions
#ResearchIntegrity
#ScholComms
Retraction Watch retweeted
“You have publishers—most of them are for profit—that demand and require constant growth because that's what the stock market requires. You have researchers...who champion quality and maybe depth and time to review. Those are in opposition.” via @Nature nature.com/articles/d41586-0…
Retraction Watch retweeted
I just recorded an interview about science misconduct for a science podcast with my phone propped up by Popper, Kuhn, Harris, Merton, @EricTopol and Kiernan. Standing on the shoulders of giants (I know, a misused phrase) seems appropriate. Will let you know when it's live.
Retraction Watch retweeted
"Salami slicing and other kinds of scientific misconduct: A faux pas for the author, a disaster for science."
An interview with me @kostenbach did in 2022, published this week: degruyter.com/document/doi/1…