我国同行评议造假撤稿分析及预防对策  

Retraction due to fake peer review in China:Analysis and preventive measures

作　　者：褚敬申 张宁[1] 徐勤毅 王尔亮 万方煜 张学颖 CHU Jingshen;ZHANG Ning;XU Qinyi;WANG Erliang;WAN Fangyu;ZHANG Xueying(Editorial Office of Journal of Diagnostics Concepts&Practice,Ruijin Hospital,School of Medicine,Shanghai Jiao Tong University,Shanghai 200025,China;Editorial Office of LabMed Discovery,Ruijin Hospital,School of Medicine,Shanghai Jiao Tong University,Shanghai 200025,China;College of Health Science and Technology,School of Medicine,Shanghai Jiao Tong University,Shanghai 200025,China;Department of Food Hygiene and Nutrition,College of Health Science and Technology,School of Medicine,Shanghai Jiao Tong University,Shanghai 200025,China;Periodical Press,Chongqing Medical University,Chongqing 401331,China)

机构地区：[1]上海交通大学医学院附属瑞金医院《诊断学理论与实践》编辑部,上海市200025 [2]上海交通大学医学院附属瑞金医院LabMed Discovery编辑部,上海市200025 [3]上海交通大学医学院医学技术学院,上海市200025 [4]上海交通大学医学院医学技术学院食品卫生与营养学系,上海市200025 [5]重庆医科大学期刊社,重庆市401331

出　　处：《中国科技期刊研究》2024年第6期852-860,共9页Chinese Journal of Scientific and Technical Periodicals

基　　金：上海市高校科技期刊研究基金(2024)“中国同行评议造假撤稿调查及对策”(SHGX2024C01);上海交通大学期刊中心2024年度期刊发展研究基金“中国同行评议造假撤稿调查及对策”(QK-A-2024008)。

摘　　要：[目的]分析我国同行评议造假撤稿的趋势及形成,并探讨预防对策。[方法]以撤稿观察网站公布的我国作者2017-2021年发表的研究型论文为研究对象,收集2022年8月31日前因同行评议造假而被撤稿的论文。结合我国此类撤稿的全球表现、趋势和合并的其他撤稿原因,采用GraphPadPrism7.0分析、推测撤稿形成路径。[结果]我国同行评议造假撤稿共635篇,占全球同期此类撤稿总量的52.0%。2020年、2021年刊出的因同行评议造假而被撤稿的研究型论文数量(95、425篇)较2017-2019年(32~43篇)明显上升。合并主要的其他撤稿原因依次为流氓编辑(65.2%)、随机生成内容(57.3%)和论文工厂(16.5%)。统计分析提示,流氓编辑与随机生成内容显著相关(r=0.998,P<0.001),二者与我国同行评议造假撤稿数上升趋势相关(r=0.991,P<0.001;r>0.999,P<0.001)。[结论]机器写作的作品经由流氓编辑操纵而批量发表,是我国同行评议造假撤稿形成的主要路径,导致近年此类撤稿数量上升;论文工厂提供的稿源是撤稿形成的次要路径。规范人工智能机器写作、遏制论文工厂及针对管理存在漏洞的期刊发布专项预警,是我国从源头、路径节点预防此类撤稿的可行对策。[Purposes]This study aims to analyze the trend and formation of retracted papers for fake peer review(FPR)in China,and explore preventive measures.[Methods]Research papers(issued from 2017 to 2021)by Chinese writers on the Retraction Watch website were taken to collect the papers retracted for FPR before August 31,2022.The global proportion,annual trend,and merged reasons for the retractions in China were analyzed using GraphPad Prism 7.0 software to infer the retraction formation process,in order to propose preventive measures.[Findings]From 2017 to 2021,a total of 635 research papers by Chinese authors were retracted due to FPR,accounting for 52.0%of global research papers retracted due to FPR during the same period.The number of retracted research papers in 2020 and 2021(95 and 425 respectively)increased significantly compared to that during 2017—2019(32–43).The main merged reasons for retraction include rogue editors(65.2%),randomly generated content(57.3%),and paper mills(16.5%).Statistical analysis suggests a significant correlation between rogue editors and randomly generated contents(r=0.998,P<0.001),and both are correlated with the increasing trend of FPR retraction in China(r=0.991,P<0.001;r>0.999,P<0.001).[Conclusions]Machinewritten works manipulated by rogue editors for mass publishing are the primary formation approach to FPR retraction in China,leading to escalated retraction in recent years.The products from paper mills serve as a secondary approach to form FPR retraction.To prevent such retraction from the source and path elements,standardizing the writing of artificial intelligence machines,curbing paper mills,and issuing special warnings for journals with management loopholes are feasible measures.

关 键 词：同行评议造假撤稿 流氓编辑 随机生成内容 学术不端 管理策略 

分 类 号：G237.5[文化科学]