A qualitative and quantitative analysis of open citations to retracted articles

The Wakefield 1998 et al.'s case

Datos Bibliográficos

ID21443436
AutoresIvan Heibi (0000-0001-5366-5194, University of Bologna), Silvio Peroni (0000-0003-0530-4305, University of Bologna)
Año2021
Volumen126
Número10
Páginas8433-8470
Fecha de publicación2021-10-01
Open AccessSí
TipoARTICLE
RevistaScientometrics (JOURNAL)
Identificadores de la revistaISSN: 0138-9130 • E-ISSN: 1588-2861
EditorialSpringer Science and Business Media LLC (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1007/s11192-021-04097-5
PMID34376878
OpenAlexW3165153945
IdiomaEN
Citas recibidas5
Referencias citadas50

In this article, we show the results of a quantitative and qualitative analysis of open citations on a popular and highly cited retracted paper: “Ileal-lymphoid-nodular hyperplasia, non-specific colitis and pervasive developmental disorder in children” by Wakefield et al . , published in 1998. The main purpose of our study is to understand the behavior of the publications citing one retracted article and the characteristics of the citations the retracted article accumulated over time. Our analysis is based on a methodology which illustrates how we gathered the data, extracted the topics of the citing articles and visualized the results. The data and services used are all open and free to foster the reproducibility of the analysis. The outcomes concerned the analysis of the entities citing Wakefield et al . ’s article and their related in-text citations. We observed a constant increasing number of citations in the last 20 years, accompanied with a constant increment in the percentage of those acknowledging its retraction. Citing articles have started either discussing or dealing with the retraction of Wakefield et al . ’s article even before its full retraction happened in 2010. Articles in the social sciences domain citing the Wakefield et al . ’s one were among those that have mostly discussed its retraction. In addition, when observing the in-text citations, we noticed that a large number of the citations received by Wakefield et al . ’s article has focused on general discussions without recalling strictly medical details, especially after the full retraction. Medical studies did not hesitate in acknowledging the retraction of the Wakefield et al . ’s article and often provided strong negative statements on it

Altmetrics · Citation · Library science · Qualitative analysis · Qualitative research · Social science · Sociology · Academic integrity and plagiarism · Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education · Computer Science · Psychology

Herramientas

Abrir DOIOpen Access