Charlotte J. Haug, M .D., Ph.D.1 The retractions came only a few months after BioMed Central, an open-access publisher also owned by Springer, retracted 43 content for the same reason. How can you really fake peer review? Moon, who studies medicinal plant life, had set up a straightforward process. He gave journals tips for peer reviewers for his manuscripts, providing them with names and e-mail addresses. But these addresses were ones he created, therefore the requests to review visited him or his colleagues directly. The fallout from Moon’s confession: 28 content in various journals published by Informa had been retracted, and one editor resigned.

We also analyzed the composite efficacy of the vaccine against the development of external genital lesions related to any HPV type . Detailed anogenital examinations had been performed in day 1 and at months 7, 12, 18, 24, 30, and 36. Biopsies had been performed for exterior genital lesions judged by the investigator to be probably, probably, or definitely linked to HPV and for any lesion whose cause was not known. Do it again biopsy of recurrent lesions was not performed to avoid overestimation of incident exterior genital lesions. All biopsy specimens had been processed independently to avoid contamination of HPV DNA and had been assessed in a blinded fashion, first for the purpose of clinical administration by pathologists at the central laboratory and for end-point adjudication by a four-member panel of pathologists.8,9 Panel members disagreed on the interpretation of 0.3 percent of the biopsy specimens and resolved the issue by meeting to secure a consensus.