Articles by the Columbia scientists with knowledge discrepancies that stay unaddressed have been largely distributed by three main publishers: Elsevier, Springer Nature and the American Affiliation for Most cancers Analysis. Dr. David alerted many journals to the info discrepancies in October.
Every writer mentioned it was investigating the issues. Springer Nature mentioned investigations take time as a result of they will contain consulting consultants, ready for creator responses and analyzing uncooked knowledge.
Dr. David has additionally raised issues about research printed independently by scientists who collaborated with the Columbia researchers on a few of their just lately retracted papers. For instance, Sandra Ryeom, an affiliate professor of surgical sciences at Columbia, printed an article in 2003 whereas at Harvard that Dr. David mentioned contained a duplicated picture. As of 2021, she was married to the extra senior Dr. Yoon, in accordance with a mortgage doc from that yr.
The paper had a proper discover appended final week saying “applicable editorial motion shall be taken” as soon as knowledge issues had been resolved. Dr. Ryeom didn’t reply to an electronic mail in search of remark.
Columbia has sought to strengthen the significance of sound analysis practices. Hours after the Occasions article appeared final month, Dr. Michael Shelanski, the medical college’s senior vice dean for analysis, despatched an electronic mail to college members titled “Analysis Fraud Accusations — Tips on how to Shield Your self.” It warned that such allegations, no matter their deserves, might take a toll on the college.
“Within the months that it might probably take to analyze an allegation,” Dr. Shelanski wrote, “funding might be suspended, and donors can really feel that their belief has been betrayed.”
