data manipulation

Illinois-based Surgisphere Corporation had a brief moment in the limelight this year following its infamous study of hydroxychloroquine. But the impact of the company’s deception reverberated across world.

The high-profile retractions of two COVID-19 studies stunned the scientific community earlier this year and prompted calls for reviews of how science is conducted, published, and acted upon. The warning signs had been there all along.

Papers from Catherine Verfaillie’s lab have been drawing fire for years.

Novartis, which bought the biotech firm in 2018, announced that the company’s top scientists have left, and news reports say it’s because they were involved in using manipulated data to get the gene therapy Zolgensma approved.

The agency is now evaluating the implications of the corrupted data behind Zolgensma and whether to “take action” against the pharmaceutical company.

Harvard and Brigham and Women’s Hospital disavow the work by former faculty member Piero Anversa.

Anne Peyroche, who was removed as interim head of France’s National Center for Scientific Research in January, committed scientific misconduct, according to the French Academy of Sciences.

Olivier Voinnet and Patrice Dunoyer face consequences for misconduct that led to the retractions of numerous high-profile papers.

The move follows two major corrections to a 2011 Nature paper, in which researchers demonstrated that a natural compound selectively kills cancer cells.

The correspondence points to routine data-massaging at a high-profile lab.

Anne Peyroche has been acting president of the French science organization since last October.

Are scores of British scientists faking data and plagiarizing?

Around one out of every four cancer papers scrutinized in a recent study contains questionable figures, and journals and authors aren’t responding to requests for clarification.

Institutions where RNA interference scientist Olivier Voinnet has worked are looking into allegations of misconduct.