@article{Ortega_Delgado-Quirós_2023, title={How do journals deal with problematic articles. Editorial response of journals to articles commented in PubPeer}, volume={32}, url={https://revista.profesionaldelainformacion.com/index.php/EPI/article/view/87096}, DOI={10.3145/epi.2023.ene.18}, abstractNote={<p class="p1">The aim of this article is to explore the editorial response of journals to research articles that may contain methodological errors or misconduct. A total of 17,244 articles commented on in <em>PubPeer</em>, a post-publication peer review site, were processed and classified according to several error and fraud categories. Then, the editorial response (i.e., editorial notices) to these papers were retrieved from <em>PubPeer</em>, <em>Retraction Watch</em>, and <em>PubMed</em> to obtain the most comprehensive picture. The results show that only 21.5% of the articles that deserve an editorial notice (i.e., honest errors, methodological flaws, publishing fraud, manipulation) were corrected by the journal. This percentage would climb to 34% for 2019 publications. This response is different between journals, but cross-sectional across all disciplines. Another interesting result is that high-impact journals suffer more from image manipulations, while plagiarism is more frequent in low-impact journals. The study concludes with the observation that the journals have to improve their response to problematic articles.</p>}, number={1}, journal={Profesional de la información / Information Professional}, author={Ortega, José-Luis and Delgado-Quirós, Lorena}, year={2023}, month={ene.} }