MEDLIB-L Archives

May 2001, Week 2


Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Daniel Burgard <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Daniel Burgard <[log in to unmask]>
Wed, 9 May 2001 09:06:08 -0500
text/plain (48 lines)
Hi.  Can someone help me out with a mess?  I am fairly new to the medical library world and am wondering if I am missing something obvious here.  A few days ago, I was working on a list of recently retracted publications to put in our library newsletter and obtained some confusing search results.  I did my initial search for retracted pubs in Ovid MEDLINE and found six items published since January 2000 had been given the publication type of "retracted publication".  I went to PubMed thinking I might find one or two additional, more up-to-date items.  To my surprise, I found less.  PubMed only lists three items published since January 2000 as being retracted publications.   Just to be clear, I am looking at things which have "retracted publication" in the publication type field, not items with the MeSH heading of  "retraction of publication".  

The three items listed way below are marked as retracted in Ovid, but are not marked as such in PubMed.  The Ovid citations are also missing the normal "retracted by" statement which is added to citations for publications which have been retracted.  

Could someone who has a different MEDLINE interface such as SilverPlatter please check these and see what comes up?   I checked the items in a few free interfaces such as BioMedNet, InfoTrieve, and Medscape and was only able to find one of the items at all (probably due to the free interfaces being a little less current).  I found the Horak article in Medscape and it was listed as a retracted publication.  Another librarian already checked in EBSCOmed and found the three items listed as retracted.

So, this is very confusing.  Is it possible that NLM sent a faulty data to the various vendors?  Or have some services done something to cause citations to be spuriously marked as retracted publications?  Or has PubMed mistakenly eliminated the retracted publication designation for three citations?  

Personally, I vote for number one given the fact that the citations give no notice of where or when they were retracted.    Since PubMed has more up-to-date (and I assume correct) information on these citations, do we think these citations will be "fixed" automatically as new releases of MEDLINE are received?  Does someone at NLM need to check on these?  Who would that be?  Is there some place like an NLM bulletin where one can check for corrected citations?

Here are the items which are listed as retracted in Ovid MEDLINE but not in PubMed.

UI 21031514
AU Horak F.  Unkauf M.  Beckers C.  Mittermaier EM.
TI Efficacy and tolerability of intranasally applied dimetindene maleate
  solution versus placebo in the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis.
SO Arzneimittel-Forschung.  50(12):1099-105, 2000 Dec.
PT Journal Article.  Retracted Publication.

UI 20547428
AU Ward RA.  Schmidt B.  Hullin J.  Hillebrand GF.  Samtleben W.
TI A comparison of on-line hemodiafiltration and high-flux hemodialysis: a
  prospective clinical study.
SO Journal of the American Society of Nephrology.  11(12):2344-50, 2000 Dec.
PT Journal Article.  Retracted Publication.

UI 20550387
AU Reid IR.
TI Calcium supplements and nail quality.
SO New England Journal of Medicine.  343(24):1817, 2000 Dec 14.
PT Letter.  Retracted Publication.

Daniel Burgard
Instructional Services Librarian
Gibson D. Lewis Health Science Library
University of North Texas Health Science Center at Fort Worth
3500 Camp Bowie Boulevard
Ft. Worth, TX 76107-2699
[log in to unmask] 
817-763-0325 (fax)