Dusit/shutterstock.com
The number of scientific articles retracted increased 10-fold between 1988 and 2008 (from 0.002% in the early 1980s to 0.02% in 2005–2009), according to a paper published in the Journal of Medical Ethics.1 The authors did note that the number of articles listed in Medline each year has also increased over time, from approximately 300,000 per year in the 1980s to more than 800,000 per year in 2009.
Concerns over the increasing number of retractions have also entered research in rheumatic disease. An article in the Journal of the American Medical Association on the effects of nitroglycerin ointment on bone density and strength in women originally published in 2011 was recently retracted after a committee at the lead author’s institution “found evidence of falsified and/or fabricated data.”2
“By and large, those contributing to the medical literature advance our understanding and do phenomenal work making the world a better place for our patients,” says Marian T. Hannan, DSc, MPH, professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School and editor in chief of Arthritis Care & Research (AC&R). “With any process, things can slip through, but with the two American College of Rheumatology [ACR] publications, we have our eyes open and minimize these concerns to the extent we can.”
Systems Closely Scrutinize Articles
Both AC&R and Arthritis & Rheumatology (A&R) have systems in place to closely scrutinize incoming articles for content, interest, significance and validity. This starts with the authors themselves.
“Most articles have several authors due to the complexity of medical data,” says Richard Bucala, MD, PhD, professor of medicine/rheumatology at the Yale University School of Medicine and editor in chief of A&R. “All authors sign a statement acknowledging they are qualified as authors, have reviewed all of the data and personally stand by the findings in the paper.”
First Look by Editors & Editorial Boards
The first cut is usually with the editor in chief and the editorial boards of the journals. They evaluate the scientific merit, the innovation and the significance of the findings. Only 20–50% of submissions make it past this initial evaluation, an indication of how stringent the requirements are.
Articles are sent to an editorial assistant to make sure they are formatted properly. Then, they are run through a software program called iThenticate, which searches the medical literature for plagiarism. The next step is the most important—peer review.
Peer Review an Important Step
“Like most upper-level medical journals, both of the ACR publications are peer reviewed,” says Dr. Bucala. “At least two, and sometimes more, experts look at the paper, the facts and the data, and give the editor assigned to that study their comments and critiques. When there is a need for statistical or other more specialized review, we have reviewers available as needed.”
Both AC&R & A&R have systems in place to closely scrutinize incoming articles for content, interest, significance & validity. This starts with the authors themselves.
All peer reviewers undergo an extensive vetting process of their own. Instead of picking the next person on the list, reviewers are assigned based on their expertise, both self-stated and published. Each is evaluated for the timeliness and thoroughness of their work after each assignment.
“The review comes back with comments to the editor and the author,” says Dr. Hannan. “Notes to the editor focus on issues the reviewer thinks the editor should look at in more depth, such as conflict of interest or things that need to be vetted further with additional experts. The notes to authors are to clear up ambiguities or add more depth to the article.”
After the questions from the reviewers and editors have been addressed, the final decision on publication rests with the editor in chief.
Quality Control after Publication
Quality control for the journals does not end with publication. Although a rare occurrence, concerns do sometimes surface.
“There is an online presence that uses software to scan the medical literature for text/figure inconsistencies and plagiarism,” notes Dr. Bucala. “A&R has had feedback from them a handful of times over the past couple of years. Problems have centered on inadvertent errors, such as flipping one figure for another, and have been addressed by erratum notices. We have found no indications of fraud.”
The readers play their important part. In some cases, the authors are contacted and the reader’s questions or concerns are addressed directly. For others, both publications welcome letters to the editor to air issues and allow the authors a chance to respond to concerns in an open forum.
The ACR also has an active Committee on Journal Publications. The committee not only serves in an oversight capacity, but members are a resource for additional insights as needed.
“These publications basically provide the validation and weight of the ACR on the published content,” says Dr. Bucala. “Authors and readers know there is a high standard of review by their peers and a board comprising worldwide experts. To have the [ACR’s] stamp of approval is critical—and contributes to the value of both A&R and AC&R to our members and readers.”
Kurt Ullman is a freelance writer based in Indiana.
References
- Wager E, Williams P. Why and how do journals retract articles? An analysis of Medline retractions 1988–2008. J Med Ethics. 2011 Sep;37(9):567–570.
- Eastell R, Hamilton CJ, Cumming SR. Notice of retraction: Jamal SA, et al. Effect of nitroglycerin ointment on bone density and strength in menopausal women: A randomized trial. JAMA. 2011;305:800–807. JAMA. 2016 Jan 26;315(4):418–419. doi: 10.1001/jama.2015.18431.
