Tackling paper mills requires us to prevent future contamination and clean up the past - the case of the journal Bioengineered
Descripción general
Resumen del artículo
This study examined articles published in the journal "Bioengineered" from 2010-2023 and found that 25.7% of the articles contained inappropriate image duplication/manipulation or had been retracted. The study focused on articles related to rodent studies and used a combination of image analysis software and manual review to identify issues. Although the study successfully identified a significant number of problematic articles, the actual number might be higher due to limited sample selection and types of problems considered.
Explícamelo como si tuviera cinco años
A study checked for problematic articles in a scientific journal and found a lot. This means people might be reading and trusting bad science.
Posibles conflictos de intereses
All authors have ongoing collaborations with ImageTwin and have been given free access in return. David Bimler and Elisabeth M. Bik receive donations through Patreon to support their work. Elisabeth M. Bik receives speaker fees and travel reimbursement for talks and workshops and consults for research institutions, funders, and publishers.
Limitaciones identificadas
Explicación de la calificación
This study provides valuable insight into the extent of problematic articles within a scientific journal. The methodology used was reasonable and included image analysis software and manual review. Although there are limitations due to sample selection and types of problems considered, the overall findings are important. The conflict of interest statement raises some concerns about potential bias, but it is not substantial enough to discredit the research.
Conviene saber
Este es el análisis de Starter. Paperzilla Pro verifica cada cita, investiga los antecedentes de los autores y las fuentes de financiación, y utiliza razonamiento avanzado con IA para ofrecer información más exhaustiva.
Explorar Pro →