These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
201 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 19902152)
1. [What can we learn from the Scott Reuben case? Scientific misconduct in anaesthesiology]. Rittner HL; Kranke P; Schäfer M; Roewer N; Brack A Anaesthesist; 2009 Dec; 58(12):1199-209. PubMed ID: 19902152 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Perpetuation of Retracted Publications Using the Example of the Scott S. Reuben Case: Incidences, Reasons and Possible Improvements. Bornemann-Cimenti H; Szilagyi IS; Sandner-Kiesling A Sci Eng Ethics; 2016 Aug; 22(4):1063-1072. PubMed ID: 26150092 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Susceptibility to fraud in systematic reviews: lessons from the Reuben case. Marret E; Elia N; Dahl JB; McQuay HJ; Møiniche S; Moore RA; Straube S; Tramèr MR Anesthesiology; 2009 Dec; 111(6):1279-89. PubMed ID: 19934873 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. [Fraudulent pain research: a hurt so deep nothing can alleviate it]. Rama-Maceiras P; Ingelmo II; Fàbregas JN; Hernández-Palazón J Rev Esp Anestesiol Reanim; 2009; 56(6):372-9. PubMed ID: 19725345 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Peering into peer review: Galileo, ESP, Dr Scott Reuben, and advancing our professional evolution. Biddle C AANA J; 2011 Oct; 79(5):365-6. PubMed ID: 23256263 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Suspected research fraud: difficulties of getting at the truth. White C BMJ; 2005 Jul; 331(7511):281-8. PubMed ID: 16052022 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Retractions in the scientific literature: do authors deliberately commit research fraud? Steen RG J Med Ethics; 2011 Feb; 37(2):113-7. PubMed ID: 21081306 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Enhancing reproducibility: Failures from Reproducibility Initiatives underline core challenges. Mullane K; Williams M Biochem Pharmacol; 2017 Aug; 138():7-18. PubMed ID: 28396196 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. How Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's Archives of Pharmacology deals with fraudulent papers from paper mills. Seifert R Naunyn Schmiedebergs Arch Pharmacol; 2021 Mar; 394(3):431-436. PubMed ID: 33547901 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. An analysis of retractions of papers authored by Scott Reuben, Joachim Boldt and Yoshitaka Fujii. McHugh UM; Yentis SM Anaesthesia; 2019 Jan; 74(1):17-21. PubMed ID: 30144024 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Scientific authorship. Part 1. A window into scientific fraud? Claxton LD Mutat Res; 2005 Jan; 589(1):17-30. PubMed ID: 15652224 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Retractions in the scientific literature: is the incidence of research fraud increasing? Steen RG J Med Ethics; 2011 Apr; 37(4):249-53. PubMed ID: 21186208 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Figure errors, sloppy science, and fraud: keeping eyes on your data. Williams CL; Casadevall A; Jackson S J Clin Invest; 2019 Mar; 129(5):1805-1807. PubMed ID: 30907748 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Academic fraud: perspectives from a lifelong anesthesia researcher. Mutch WA Can J Anaesth; 2011 Sep; 58(9):782-4, 784-8. PubMed ID: 21643872 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Improving biomedical journals' ethical policies: the case of research misconduct. Bosch X J Med Ethics; 2014 Sep; 40(9):644-6. PubMed ID: 24505117 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Readers as research detectives. Gøtzsche PC Trials; 2009 Jan; 10():2. PubMed ID: 19128482 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Correcting the literature following fraudulent publication. Friedman PJ JAMA; 1990 Mar; 263(10):1416-9. PubMed ID: 2406474 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]