Retracted articles in endodontic-related literature: an analysis of 60 cases.

Introduction: The number of retracted articles in the bio-medical field, including dentistry, is increasing. The objective of this study was to identify retracted articles in endodontic-related literature and outline their main characteristics.

Evidence acquisition: The Medline and Scopus databases were searched in January 2024. Additional records were identified by consulting the online database www.retractiondatabase.org. Retracted articles concerning endodontic topics and the relative retraction notes were retrieved and relevant data extracted.

Evidence synthesis: Sixty articles were identified, published between 2004 and 2022, with a mean of 3.0±2.3 retracted articles per year. The number of retracted articles per year did not significantly grow over time. The average time between the article and retraction note publication was 36.1±22.3 months. The majority of articles originated from Asia and were in-vitro studies. Only 6.7% of the articles were retracted due to honest errors. The main reasons of retraction were image/data manipulation (20%), plagiarism (18%), unavailability of raw data (10%), authorship issues (10%) and publication process issues (10%). A single research group accounted for 17 retractions.

Conclusions: Unlike the dental field, the number of retracted articles in endodontics has not increased significantly over the time period considered. Despite this, controls against research misconduct must be increased to preserve the credibility of scientific research.