Covid-19 has spurred collaborations and recognition of the value of open science to addressing global health crises. It has also spurred some faulty science (just take a look at Retraction Watch’s list of retracted coronavirus papers). When methodologies, peer review and editorial review processes fail, a publication retraction is one means of invalidating research, but it is not always effective. Retracted papers may not be marked as such, they may remain in personal libraries and citations, and they may continue to be cited. “Recommendations from the Reducing the Inadvertent Spread of Retracted Science: Shaping a Research and Implementation Agenda Project” is an impressive report with suggestions for addressing these problems:
- Develop a systematic cross-industry approach to ensure the public availability of consistent, standardized, interoperable, and timely information about retractions.
- Recommend a taxonomy of retraction categories/classifications and corresponding retraction metadata that can be adopted by all stakeholders.
- Develop best practices for coordinating the retraction process to enable timely, fair, unbiased outcomes.
- Educate stakeholders about publication correction processes including retraction and about pre- and post-publication stewardship of the scholarly record.
The report is published on the MetaArxiv preprint server and includes a CRediT statement of contributors. Appendix A covers RISRS project outcomes accomplished and in process, with links to papers and data sets. Wide participation in the implementation of recommendations is encouraged.
