Why is this important?

Knowledge accumulation is a fundamental principle in science and forms the basis for progress and innovation. Through a continuous process, knowledge is acquired, deepened, broadened and revised. This process enables researchers to continuously ask new questions and solve complex problems. This involves building on past research and already published research results. It is crucial to be able to trust the scientific literature. Building on knowledge that is incorrect or incomplete undermines the quality of research and the advancement of knowledge.

However, not all research publications are of equally high quality. It is the task of researchers to distinguish high-quality publications from those that fall short in terms of quality and integrity. For instance, the utmost caution is required when using publications that appeared in journals that do not use peer review (often so-called 'predatory journals') or that were produced by 'paper mills'. Even in articles in high-quality journals, ‘honest mistakes’ (errors) or breaches of research integrity are sometimes found after publication. Publications can be corrected or retracted. Sometimes this is not (yet) the case, but it is already documented which (suspicions of) shortcomings or breaches of research integrity have been identified. It is important to recognise such publications, to avoid using them, and (in the case of corrected publications) to use the most recent version of a publication.

Read more:

• The quality of a journal - Mind the GAP - VLIR training on good academic research
• Honest Signaling and Research Integrity

Tools and instruments

There are various tools and instruments that enable researchers to determine whether a publication has been retracted, corrected or contested. New initiatives are launched regularly and the functionality of existing instruments is expanded. In addition, some tools cease to exist after a while. It is therefore important to always examine the quality and functionality of the available tools and instruments before using them. When used responsibly and thoughtfully, these tools and instruments can help detect 'suspect' papers. They are a useful complement to the reader's own critical (human) evaluation of each publication. Below, some examples are briefly outlined, without aiming for completeness.

Read more:

• Ethical considerations around watchlists
• A unified approach to safeguard research integrity

When a journal is part of the Crossmark initiative, each (online available) article in that journal has a clickable 'check for updates' button. By clicking this, the reader can see the current status of the article, whether there are any updates to the research findings and whether the article has been corrected or withdrawn.

More on ‘check for updates’: https://www.crossref.org/services/crossmark/ 

The Retraction Watch database contains publications that have been retracted, corrected or about which doubts have been raised. The database is freely searchable for any researcher. It is linked to Endnote and Zotero. Researchers using one of these systems to manage their bibliography will see a warning for articles that have been retracted.

More on Retraction Watch: https://onderzoektips.ugent.be/en/tips/00001797/ 

On the online platform PubPeer, researchers (anonymously or not) post comments on published articles. This brings to light questions and doubts about the quality of some articles. Other researchers can search the PubPeer database for comments on an article. PubPeer can be integrated as a plugin in Zotero and in various web browsers, allowing researchers to see a warning when consulting an article included in PubPeer.

More on PubPeer: https://pubpeer.com/

Signals evaluates the research integrity of a paper based on the publication itself (including references used and self-citations) and of its authors (including retracted articles).

More on Signals: https://app.research-signals.com/