- Jul 2018
-
europepmc.org europepmc.org
-
On 2017 May 29, Rashmi Das commented:
We thank Harri for his PERSONAL (NON PEER REVIEWED) OPINION which is available at above HANDLE ( http://hdl.handle.net/10138/153180) THAT CONTAINS DIRECT COPY AND PASTE OF THREE FIGURES/IMAGES FROM OUR PREVIOUS PUBLICATIONS (JAMA 2014 and Cochrane 2013). We are happy to reply to above comments made by Harri. First regarding the Cochrane review which was withdrawn in 2015, the detailed report is already available at following link (http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD001364.pub5/abstract). This report is the collaborative observation and conclusion of the Cochrane editors (UNLIKE THE HANDLE WHICH CONTAINS MORE OF PERSONAL OPINION WHICH HAS ALREADY BEEN EXAMINED BY THE COCHRANE EDITORS BEFORE REACHING THE CONCLUSION). The same HANDLE WAS SENT TO JAMA EDITORS REGARDING THE JAMA CLINICAL SYNOPSIS (PUBLISHED IN 2014) AND HARRI REQUESTED THE EDITORS TO CARRY OUT THE INVESTIGATION AND VERIFY. THE EDITORS ASKED US FOR REPLY WHICH WE CLARIFIED IN A POINT TO POINT MANNER (BOTH THE COMMENT BY HARRI AND OUR REPLY WAS PUBLISHED, SEE BELOW). HAD THE COMMENT/REPORT BY HARRI WAS ENTIRELY CORRECT, THE JAMA EDITORS COULD HAVE STRAIGHTWAY RETRACTED/WITHDRAWN THE SYNOPSIS WITHOUT GOING FOR PUBLICATION OF THE COMMENT/REPLY (Both are available at following: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26284729; https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26284728). IT HAS TO BE MADE CLEAR THAT THE JAMA SYNOPSIS (DAS 2014) WAS WITHDRAWN AS THE SOURCE DOCUMENT ON WHICH IT WAS BASED (COCHRANE 2013 REVIEW) WAS WITHDRAWN (NOT BASED ON THE REPORT IN THE HANDLE WHICH IS A PERSONAL NON PEER REVIEWED OPINION). The irony is that though HARRI'S COMMENT got published as LETTER TO EDITOR in JAMA after OUR REPLY, still the NON PEER REVIEWED HANDLE THAT CONTAINS DIRECT COPY OF THREE FIGURES/IMAGES FROM OUR PUBLICATION IS GETTING PROPAGATED.
This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY. -
On 2017 May 24, Harri Hemila commented:
Background of the retraction
Concerns were expressed about unattributed copying of text and data, and about numerous other problems in the Cochrane review “Zinc for the Common Cold” by Singh M, 2013. Details of the concerns are available at: http://hdl.handle.net/10138/153180.
The Cochrane review was withdrawn, see Singh M, 2015.
The JAMA summary of the Cochrane review by Das RR, 2014 had numerous additional problems of its own.
Detailed description of problems in Das RR, 2014 are available at http://hdl.handle.net/10138/153617.
This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.
-
- Feb 2018
-
europepmc.org europepmc.org
-
On 2017 May 24, Harri Hemila commented:
Background of the retraction
Concerns were expressed about unattributed copying of text and data, and about numerous other problems in the Cochrane review “Zinc for the Common Cold” by Singh M, 2013. Details of the concerns are available at: http://hdl.handle.net/10138/153180.
The Cochrane review was withdrawn, see Singh M, 2015.
The JAMA summary of the Cochrane review by Das RR, 2014 had numerous additional problems of its own.
Detailed description of problems in Das RR, 2014 are available at http://hdl.handle.net/10138/153617.
This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.
-