TY - JOUR T1 - Retractions in the medical literature: how can patients be protected from risk? JF - Journal of Medical Ethics JO - J Med Ethics SP - 228 LP - 232 DO - 10.1136/medethics-2011-100184 VL - 38 IS - 4 AU - R Grant Steen Y1 - 2012/04/01 UR - http://jme.bmj.com/content/38/4/228.abstract N2 - Background Medical research so flawed as to be retracted may put patients at risk by influencing treatments.Objective To explore hypotheses that more patients are put at risk if a retracted paper appears in a journal with a high impact factor (IF) so that the paper is widely read; is written by a ‘repeat offender’ author who has produced other retracted research; or is a clinical trial.Methods English language papers (n=788) retracted from the PubMed database between 2000 and 2010 were evaluated. Only those papers retracting research with humans or freshly derived human material were included; 180 retracted primary papers (22.8%) met inclusion criteria. Subjects enrolled and patients treated were tallied, both in the retracted primary studies and in 851 secondary studies that cited a retracted primary paper.Results Retracted papers published in high-IF journals were cited more often (p=0.0004) than those in low-IF journals, but there was no difference between high- and low-IF papers in subjects enrolled or patients treated. Retracted papers published by ‘repeat offender’ authors did not enrol more subjects or treat more patients than papers by one-time offenders, nor was there a difference in number of citations. However, retracted clinical trials treated more patients (p=0.0002) and inspired secondary studies that put more patients at risk (p=0.0019) than did other kinds of medical research.Conclusions If the goal is to minimise risk to patients, the appropriate focus is on clinical trials. Clinical trials form the foundation of evidence-based medicine; hence, the integrity of clinical trials must be protected. ER -