Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Scientific integrity has been increasingly challenged by scientific misconduct and paper mills, resulting in an increase in retractions. Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's Archives of Pharmacology has been significantly impacted by fraudulent submissions, resulting in numerous retractions. By analyzing retraction notes and utilizing a post-publication surveillance strategy, this editorial discusses how this journal continues to deal with problematic publications, uncovers image- and physiological-related integrity issues, and responds to fraudulent activity. By adopting innovative methods to detect integrity issues and transparently communicating our concerns, we aim to increase awareness among scientists and scientific journals.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00210-024-03697-1 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!