1 The retractions came only a few months after BioMed Central.

This pressure exists just about everywhere but is particularly intense in China. It is as a result no real surprise that the most inventive ways to game the peer-review system to get manuscripts released have come from China. The firms mentioned above that provide fake peer evaluations all result from China and countries in Southeast Asia, & most of the authors involved in these full cases result from the same areas. But it will be a mistake to look at this as a Chinese or Asian problem. The problem is the perverse incentive systems in scientific publishing. Provided that authors are rewarded for publishing many articles and editors are rewarded for publishing them quickly, new ways of gaming the traditional publication models will be invented more quickly than new control procedures could be put in place..For the new study, june 18 in Environmental Wellness Perspectives published, researchers reviewed data from the Nurses’ Health Study II, a long-running research project that kicked off in 1989 and tracked 116,430 nurses. Of them, the researchers honed in on 325 ladies who had a child with autism and 22, 000 women who had a child without autism. Specifically, the researchers wished to determine pollutant amounts at that time and host to a child’s birth by using readings from the Environmental Protection Agency . They ruled out other elements such as income, education smoking and level during pregnancy.