Dana-Farber Cancer Institute is facing a major scandal after allegations of data forgery were made against four researchers, including the institute's president Laurie Glimcher. The controversy has led to six studies being retracted and 31 others needing corrections.
One manuscript still needs examination before it can be corrected or retracted.
Dana-Farber Cancer Institute is facing a major scandal after allegations of data forgery were made against four researchers, including the institute's president Laurie Glimcher. The controversy has led to six studies being retracted and 31 others needing corrections. Dana-Farber has identified one manuscript that still needs examination before it can be corrected or retracted.
The allegations of data forgery were made by scientist Sholto David in a blog post, which took aim at the four researchers accused of plagiarism and other misconduct. The controversy comes after former Harvard University president Claudine Gay resigned amidst plagiarism allegations earlier this month.
Dana-Farber has taken swift action to address the issue by retracting six studies and correcting 31 others, with one manuscript still under examination. This is a common practice for institutions with strong research integrity processes in place, as they work to ensure that their scientific record remains accurate and reliable.
Dana-Farber Cancer Institute is seeking to retract six studies and correct 31 others following allegations of data forgery.
Scientist Sholto David's blog took aim at four Dana-Farber researchers, including the institute's president Laurie Glimcher.
Dana-Farber has identified 6 manuscripts with retractions underway and 31 that need corrections. One is still being examined.
Accuracy
No Contradictions at Time
Of
Publication
Deception
(100%)
None Found At Time Of
Publication
Fallacies
(85%)
The article contains several examples of informal fallacies. The author uses an appeal to authority by stating that Dana-Farber Cancer Institute is seeking to retract six studies and correct 31 others following a bombshell blog from scientist Sholto David. This statement implies that the institution's decision should be trusted because it comes from an expert in the field, but this does not necessarily mean that their actions are justified or accurate. The author also uses inflammatory rhetoric by stating that some of the potential errors flagged by blogger Sholto David had come up in Dana-Farber's ongoing reviews and that they have taken prompt and decisive action to correct them, implying a sense of urgency and importance. This language is meant to persuade readers to trust the institution's actions without providing any evidence or context for why these errors were found or how they will be corrected.
The author uses an appeal to authority by stating that Dana-Farber Cancer Institute is seeking to retract six studies and correct 31 others following a bombshell blog from scientist Sholto David. This statement implies that the institution's decision should be trusted because it comes from an expert in the field, but this does not necessarily mean that their actions are justified or accurate.
The author uses inflammatory rhetoric by stating that some of the potential errors flagged by blogger Sholto David had come up in Dana-Farber's ongoing reviews and that they have taken prompt and decisive action to correct them, implying a sense of urgency and importance. This language is meant to persuade readers to trust the institution's actions without providing any evidence or context for why these errors were found or how they will be corrected.
Bias
(85%)
The article contains multiple examples of bias. The author uses inflammatory language such as 'data forgery' and 'pathetic amateurishness' to describe the actions of Dana-Farber researchers. Additionally, the author quotes a blog post that makes accusations against specific individuals without providing any evidence or context beyond what is stated in the article itself.
Quoting a blog post that makes accusations against specific individuals without providing any evidence or context.
The use of inflammatory language such as 'data forgery' and 'pathetic amateurishness'
Site
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
Rick Sobey has a conflict of interest with Dana-Farber Cancer Institute as he is reporting on the retraction of studies and data forgery allegations against them. He also reports on Claudine Gay's involvement in the scandal.
Author
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
The author has a conflict of interest on the topic of data forgery allegations against Dana-Farber Cancer Institute. The article mentions that the institute is facing multiple lawsuits related to this issue and it also quotes Laurie Glimcher, who was previously accused in one of these lawsuits.
