Skip to main content
Tessa NewsLink
Paste a health news link, or browse

Several possible studies

Story checked

Schneider Shorts 2.10.2026 – It is not possible to predict which publications may be retracted in the future – For Better Science (opens in a new tab)

Schneider Shorts 2.10.2026 – It is not possible to predict which publications may be retracted in the future · 2026-10-02

Short answerEvidenceSource

Short answer

Several possible studies

No clear answer.

More than one paper fits the article's details, and none fits well enough to single out. Checking claims against the wrong study would be worse than not checking them at all.

Checked against the study summary. The full text wasn't available, so some details couldn't be settled either way.

Share this check

Follow the evidence trail
1

The story

Schneider Shorts 2.10.2026 – It is not possible to predict which publications may be retracted in the future – For Better Science

Schneider Shorts 2.10.2026 – It is not possible to predict which publications may be retracted in the future · 2026-10-02

The story’s checkable claims.

Read the original story (opens in a new tab)
2

NewsLink checks it

Several studies could be the source of this story.

More than one paper fits the article's details, and none fits well enough to single out. Checking claims against the wrong study would be worse than not checking them at all.

Open claim evidence
3

Search result

Several studies could fit.

More than one paper fits the article's details, and none fits well enough to single out. Checking claims against the wrong study would be worse than not checking them at all.

Source paper

Source layer

The 34 papers the story cites

Source study separated from background citations.

The research anchor for the report.

Related research

Research nearby

The papers it could be

Nearby papers when the source is unclear.

and 46 more considered

Then inspect each claim

Evidence layer

Claim by claim

What the story asserts. With no source study, there is nothing to check these against.

Claim 1 of 7Not checkedThe article argues that the issue is not limited to one scandal: it presents a series of retractions and misconduct findings spanning toxicology, AI/papermilling, biotech, trachea transplantation, cancer biology, and matrix biology.View evidenceHide evidence

Not checked

NewsLink could not identify one source study, so this claim was not compared against a paper.

Claim 2 of 7Not checkedIt says Jerry Chun-Wei Lin was found guilty of research misconduct by his institution in Norway, but later acquitted by a national authority, which also revoked the retraction decisions tied to his papers.View evidenceHide evidence

Not checked

NewsLink could not identify one source study, so this claim was not compared against a paper.

Claim 3 of 7Not checkedThe article says Denali Therapeutics retracted a preclinical Cell Reports paper after concluding that the first author altered data and was solely and fully responsible, while the altered data affected the key in vitro conclusions.View evidenceHide evidence

Not checked

NewsLink could not identify one source study, so this claim was not compared against a paper.

Claim 4 of 7Not checkedIt reports that a Transplantation perspective/review by Martin Birchall and Paolo Macchiarini was retracted because it relied on data and clinical outcomes from a previously retracted 2008 Lancet airway-transplant paper.View evidenceHide evidence

Not checked

NewsLink could not identify one source study, so this claim was not compared against a paper.

Claim 5 of 7Not checkedThe article says Caroline Dive’s British Journal of Pharmacology paper was retracted after concerns about western blot construction and splicing, with the authors describing the issue as an honest error during figure construction.View evidenceHide evidence

Not checked

NewsLink could not identify one source study, so this claim was not compared against a paper.

Claim 6 of 7Not checkedIt says Palma Rocchi’s Journal of Steroid Biochemistry and Molecular Biology paper was retracted because of concerns about ethical approval and republication of figures from an earlier Oncogene paper without appropriate citation, and it also mentions additional image-theft concerns in other Rocchi papers.View evidenceHide evidence

Not checked

NewsLink could not identify one source study, so this claim was not compared against a paper.

Claim 7 of 7Not checkedThe article says Nikos Karamanos’s Matrix Biology Plus paper was retracted after the journal found duplicated and shifted image sections, overlapping image fields, and other errors that undermined confidence in the results.View evidenceHide evidence

Not checked

NewsLink could not identify one source study, so this claim was not compared against a paper.

Finally, the search trail

Method layer

No single source study was found.

NewsLink still surfaces nearby research so you can inspect the field instead of a single paper.

Nearby research

No exact source, but these papers are close.

Crossref, PubMed, Europe PMC · 47 candidate papers

Candidate

RETRACTED: A Radical Safety Measure for Identifying Environmental Changes Using Machine Learning Algorithms

Electronics · 2022 · Crossref

Source (opens in a new tab)
Candidate

RETRACTED: Iron doped vanadium sulfide anemone like nanorod structure for electrochemical water oxidation

Current Applied Physics · 2021 · Crossref

Source (opens in a new tab)

And 42 more candidates considered.