Does retraction after misconduct have an impact on citations? A pre-post study

Abstract

Background Retracted articles continue to be cited after retraction, and this could have consequences for the scientific community and the general population alike. This study was conducted to analyse the association between retraction and the citations received by papers retracted due to misconduct, using two time frames: (1) a post-retraction period equivalent to the time the article had been in print before retraction, and (2) the total post-retraction period. Methods This was a quasi-experimental, pre–post evaluation study. A total of 304 retracted original articles and literature reviews indexed in MEDLINE fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Articles were required to have been published in a MEDLINE-indexed journal between January 2013 and December 2015 and to have been retracted between January 2014 and December 2016. The main outcome was the number of citations received before and after retraction. Results were stratified by journal quartile according to impact factor, and the most cited papers during the pre-retraction period were analysed separately. Results There was an increase in post-retraction citations compared with citations received pre-retraction. However, two exceptions were observed. First, citations received by articles published in first-quartile journals decreased immediately after retraction (p < 0.05), but increased again after some time had elapsed. Second, post-retraction citations decreased significantly for articles that had received a high number of citations prior to retraction (p < 0.05). Conclusions The results indicate that article retraction has no association with citations in the long term, as retracted articles continue to be cited, effectively circumventing their retraction