Have major medical journals issued retractions or expressions of concern about bosworth’s work?
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Executive summary
Available sources do not report any major medical journal retractions or expressions of concern specifically naming work by “Bosworth.” The materials supplied focus on broad trends in retractions, databases that track them, and one state action revoking a Dr. Bosworth’s license (South Dakota) — but they do not link that regulatory action to journal retractions or expressions of concern [1] [2] [3].
1. What the record-searchable databases say — big picture, not person-specific
Large, public efforts now track tens of thousands of retractions and flag problematic papers: the Retraction Watch Database surpassed 60,000 records and is widely used by researchers and journalists [4] [2]. Academic analyses drawing on Retraction Watch and other sources document rising retraction rates across biomedical publishing and growing attention to misconduct and data problems [3] [5] [6]. Those resources are the places to check for journal notices naming an author; the supplied reporting does not show a Retraction Watch entry or database record explicitly about Bosworth [4] [3].
2. Major journals’ practices and when they issue expressions of concern
Editorial guidance from bodies such as COPE and journal analyses make clear that journals publish expressions of concern when investigations are pending and issue retractions when papers are shown to be seriously flawed or fraudulent [7]. Recent scholarship and commentary emphasize that editors sometimes delay retraction, substitute corrections, or publish expressions of concern as an interim measure [7] [8]. The supplied sources explain the thresholds and mechanisms journals use, but they do not cite any specific expression-of-concern or retraction notice for a Bosworth paper [7] [8].
3. Concrete searches in the supplied reporting: no match found
The excerpts and articles provided include multiple analyses of retraction trends, journal-specific retraction reporting (e.g., Retraction Watch coverage of BMJ and others), and database counts — but none of these supplied snippets or titles list a Bosworth retraction or note of concern [9] [4] [2] [3]. Therefore, based on the documents you gave me, major journals issuing formal retractions or expressions of concern about Bosworth’s work is not documented [4] [3].
4. Related public actions that appear in the sources — regulatory, not editorial
One supplied story records that a South Dakota medical board revoked Annette Bosworth’s medical license following a felony conviction [1]. That is a disciplinary/regulatory action distinct from a journal issuing a retraction or expression of concern. The sources do not connect that license revocation to journal editorial notices or to retraction databases [1] [4]. Available sources do not mention any journals taking editorial action tied to that revocation.
5. Where to look next and how to interpret silence
The most reliable next steps are (a) search the Retraction Watch Database and Crossref retraction metadata for “Bosworth,” (b) search PubMed and specific high‑impact journals’ websites for expressions of concern or retraction notices, and (c) check COPE‑ or publisher‑hosted retraction statements. The supplied material stresses that editorial practices vary and that absence of a retraction in public databases may reflect ongoing investigation, editorial caution, or simply that no problematic paper has been identified [7] [3].
6. Caveats, conflicting interpretations, and hidden agendas
Reporting on retractions is shaped by watchdog activity and editorial willingness to act; Retraction Watch’s database and journalists often drive discovery and pressure [2] [4]. That activism can lead to many post‑publication notices — but absence of a notice in the datasets you provided is not proof that no concerns exist elsewhere; it only means the supplied sources do not mention such journal actions [4] [3]. Also, regulatory punishment (medical licence revocation) may reflect legal/ethical findings distinct from the scientific publishing record [1].
Limitations: This analysis uses only the documents you supplied. If you want definitive confirmation about journal actions naming any Bosworth publications, I can run targeted checks of the Retraction Watch Database, PubMed, Crossref retraction metadata, and specific journal sites — those sources are directly referenced in the supplied material as the authoritative trackers of retractions [4] [3] [7].