نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی
نویسندگان
1 استادیار گروه کتابداری و اطلاع رسانی پزشکی، دانشکده پیراپزشکی، دانشگاه علوم پزشکی زاهدان، زاهدان، ایران.
2 دانشجوی کارشناسی ارشد کتابداری و اطلاع رسانی، دانشکده پیراپزشکی، دانشگاه علوم پزشکی تهران، تهران، ایران.
چکیده
کلیدواژه‌ها
موضوعات
عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسندگان [English]
Purpose: Retraction of articles is necessary to maintain the integrity and credibility of published scientific articles and to inform all audiences about potential serious scientific and ethical problems in these articles. Studies show that in the field of medicine, many articles receive citations even after retraction. Altmetrics is actually a method based on scientific data that evaluates the impact of research and studies done in social media using the interactions and works of researchers. The aim of the present study is to investigate the scientific impact and Altmetrics of the open and closed access retracted systematic review.
Methodology: PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases were searched with suitable keywords, a total of 433 articles were collected in the initial search, 143 articles were excluded due to duplicates and 81 articles were excluded for reasons such as non-systematic review, non-retracted, and non-medical. Finally, 209 articles met the inclusion criteria for this article. Data on type of access, reasons of retraction, data related to Altmetrics and citation of articles were extracted. Retracted articles were searched by two in researchers independently. All the required data were collected by the checklist designed in Excel software and the data was updated in June 2023. Firstly, Endnote version 9 was used to screen the data, then Altmetrics and citation data extraction checklist was designed in the Excel version 2019. Finally, Data analyzed in the Excel 2019 and SPSS 21 software. Descriptive statistics and Pearson's correlation coefficient test was used for analytical statistics.
Findings: The findings showed that more than 67% of the articles were open access and the average age of these articles was 6.39 ± 3.15. The period of publication of all reviewed articles was 2001 to 2022 and the period of publication of open access articles was 2008 to 2022, and these articles were retracted between 2011 and 2022. The most common reason for retraction of open and closed access articles was honest error and fake peer review respectively. The average Altmetrics score for all retracted articles was 42.44. The average Altmetrics score of retracted systematic review articles with open access was about 78.83 ± 463.56. The results of the altmetrics analysis of these articles showed that 64 articles had no altmetrics score out of all the reviewed articles, of which 33 were related to closed access articles. According to the WOS database, the total number of citations for the retracted systematic review articles was 3713, and the open access articles received more citations than the closed access articles, and this average was 17.78 ± 45.99. Most of the tweeters from the reviewed SR/MA articles were members of the public for both open and closed access articles. It should be noted that some articles were noticed by more than one reader in social networks. In only 28% of the retracted SR/MA, detailed access to theMendeley with country names was provided. Most of the readers of retracted OA and CA articles in two social networks; Twitter and Mendeley, belonged to the United States. The results of the Pearson correlation test showed that there is a correlation between the Altmetrics score and the total number of citations of the reviewed articles in Scopus and WOS databases. (P-value=0.000).
Conclusion: Our findings showed that retracted articles may be used in the scientific and social communities even after the retraction. In addition, in retracted systematic review studies, which have been retracted especially due to scientific errors in the results and methods, publishing part of their results through social networks may be used in clinical decisions and endanger people's health Since many researchers share their scientific research in academic social networks such as Research Gate and Academia, in addition, public social networks such as X, Facebook and YouTube, which used scientific studies in some content, should be designed with soft Smart software to analyze and evaluate the validity of scientific studies and sources mentioned in these social networks.. This issue requires informing the senior managers of social networks about the necessity of more monitoring of published scientific contents. Providing timely information to the audience as well as using new technologies will reduce the use of this type of articles. In addition to, by using artificial intelligence techniques in the future, maybe the amount of citations to the retracted articles will be minimized.
کلیدواژه‌ها [English]
)