Skip to main content
. 2024 May 17;8(1):e110. doi: 10.1017/cts.2024.533

Table 1.

Characteristics of 884 retraction notices in clinical and translational research

Characteristic N (%)
 Time from publication to retraction, years, median (IQR) 1.0 (0.4–2.4)
 Word count of retraction notice, median (IQR) 109 (70–169)
Entity(ies) named in the retraction notice as retracting the article 1
 Author(s) 512 (58%)
 Ambiguous Editor(s)/Journal/Publisher 2 29 (3%)
 Editor(s) 381 (43%)
 Journal 45 (5%)
 Publisher 139 (16%)
 Other 3 22 (2%)  
 Not Stated 53 (6%)
Entity that initiated the investigation or discovered the retraction should occur
 Author(s) 358 (40%)
 Editor(s)/Journal/Publisher 29 (3%)
 Letter to Editor 13 (1%)
 External Investigation 41 (5%)
 Readers 52 (6%)
 Unnamed Entity 95 (11%)
 Other 33 (4%)
 Not Stated 277 (31%)
Author involvement in the retraction process
 Yes, and no authors explicitly disagreed with retraction 697 (79%)
 Yes, and some author(s) explicitly disagreed with retraction 65 (7%)
 Author(s) unresponsive 17 (2%)
 Not stated 105 (12%)
Types of Errors
 Getting or Acquiring Only 336 (38%)
 Preparing or Analyzing Only 217 (25%)
 Getting or Acquiring and Preparing or Analyzing 31 (4%)
 Something Else 294 (33%)
 Unknown 6 (1%)
1

Response categories were not mutually exclusive.

2

e.g., “We retract this article…”

3

e.g., institutions, medical centers, professional organizations.