Tackling paper mills requires us to prevent future contamination and clean up the past – the case of the journal <i>Bioengineered</i>
2025/03/27 by Rene Aquarius, René Aquarius, Aquarius, Rene +8 · 8 voices · 2 citations
Social Sciences · Medicine · #Academic integrity and plagiarism #Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
paper · pdf · doi:10.1080/21655979.2025.2542668
Abstract
Taylor & Francis journal Bioengineered has been targeted by paper mills. Our goal is to identify problematic articles published in Bioengineered during the period 2010 to 2024. Dimensions was used to search for articles that contained the terms ‘mouse’ OR ‘mice’ OR ‘rat’ OR ‘rats’ in title or abstract, published in Bioengineered between January 1st 2010 to December 31st 2024. All articles were assessed by eye and by using software to detect inappropriate image duplication and manipulation. An article was classified as problematic if it contained inappropriate image duplication or manipulation or had been previously retracted. Problematic articles were reported on PubPeer by the authors if they had not been reported previously. All included articles were assessed for post-publication editorial decisions. We have excluded all articles published in 2024 from further analysis, as these were all retraction notices. We assessed the remaining 878 articles, of which 226 (25.7%) were identified as problematic, of which 35 had been previously retracted. One retracted article was later de-retracted. One article received a correction. None of the included articles received an expression of concern or the Taylor & Francis ‘under investigation’ pop-up. Taylor & Francis’ lack of visible editorial action has left the scientific community vulnerable to reading and citing hundreds of problematic articles published in Bioengineered. To uphold scientific integrity, Taylor & Francis should use the findings of this study as a starting point to systematically identify all compromised articles in Bioengineered and take appropriate editorial action.
Citations
Cited by
Discussions
- Now on arXiv: @deadneanderthals.bsky.social's preprint on paper mill contamination in @tandfresearch.bsky.social's journal Bioengineered. An analysis of 878 papers, of which 226 (25.7%) were identifie [bsky, 69 points, 1 comments]
- Now, @elisabethbik.bsky.social , @mortenoxe.bsky.social , @smutclyde.bsky.social , @thatsregrettab1.bsky.social and I wrote a paper about it. The pre-print is on #arXiv Read for free, here: arxiv.org/ [bsky, 15 points, 1 comments]
- new from @deadneanderthals.bsky.social et al. arxiv.org/abs/2503.21267 Taylor & Francis slow to clean up the mess after finding they are infested by paper mills. In this regard, Hindawi did much bette [bsky, 13 points, 2 comments]
- Our preprint, soon to be published, is what led to Taylor & Francis’ decision to halt submissions to Bioengineered, mentioned by the Guardian. We appreciate the support. @deadneanderthals.bsky.social [bsky, 3 points, 0 comments]
- Publisher's "lack of editorial action has left the scientific community vulnerable to reading and citing hundreds of problematic articles," say a team of leading sleuths. H/T @retractionwatch.com arxi [bsky, 2 points, 0 comments]
- "Taylor & Francis’ lack of editorial action has left the scientific community vulnerable to reading and citing hundreds of problematic articles published in Bioengineered" doi.org/10.48550/arX... [bsky, 0 points, 0 comments]
- La revue Bioengineered, connue pour publier des articles produits par des "paper mills", avait affirmé en 2023 s'attaquer au problème. Une analyse révèle qu'elle abrite encore des centaines d'articles [bsky, 0 points, 0 comments]
- people have done this. You are pretending like she is alone in this, yet just very recently a group (including her & others) looked at a different journal & have published a preprint that they have th [bsky, 0 points, 2 comments]
Related