A scoping review of retracted publications in anesthesiology

Context: Fraudulent publication is a scourge of scientific research.Objectives: This scoping review was aimed at characterizing retracted publications for fraud or plagiarism in the field of anesthesia. Does the reputation of the journal (Quartile and Impact Factor, IF) protect the reader from the risk of having the manuscript he read withdrawn for fraud/plagiarism?Methods/Design: This scoping review was planned following the Joanna Briggs Institute recommendations. Data sources: PubMed and the Retraction Watch Database (http://retractiondatabase.org/RetractionSearch.aspx?).Study selection: All types of publications retracted. Data extraction: Year, first author nationality, journal name, journal category, IF, Quartile, H index.Data analysis: The association with Quartile and IF was investigated.Results: No significant association between retraction of papers published in no-Quartile journals and retractions published in journals placed in the highest quartile.Conclusions: The quality of the surveillance in paper submission is not higher in journals of the first Quartile than in journals not placed in other Quartiles. (The protocol was prospectively registered in the Open Science Framework https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/TGKNE)