Pandemic publication: correction and erratum in COVID-19 publications
Open Access
- 21 November 2020
- journal article
- letter
- Published by Springer Nature in Scientometrics
- Vol. 126 (2) , 1849-1857
Abstract
This commentary identifies and characterizes correction and erratum in COVID-19 publications with a scientometric approach by considering their rate of growth, reasons for correction, the time-span between publishing the original and corrected versions, as well as their citation status in four questions. It also suggestions to solve the current issues regarding indexing, retrieving, publishing, and research evaluation.Keywords
This publication has 20 references indexed in Scilit:
- The state of the art in peer reviewFEMS Microbiology Letters, 2018
- Preprints: An underutilized mechanism to accelerate outbreak sciencePLOS Medicine, 2018
- Survey on open peer review: Attitudes and experience amongst editors, authors and reviewersPLOS ONE, 2017
- To Err is human? How typographical and orthographical errors affect perceptions of online reviewersComputers in Human Behavior, 2017
- Erratum, corrigenda et emendatio or "mistake, correction and amendment"International Orthopaedics, 2017
- Post retraction citations in context: a case studyScientometrics, 2017
- Emerging trends in peer review—a surveyFrontiers in Neuroscience, 2015
- Multi-Stage Open Peer Review: Scientific Evaluation Integrating the Strengths of Traditional Peer Review with the Virtues of Transparency and Self-RegulationFrontiers in Computational Neuroscience, 2012
- Characterization of Published Errors in High-Impact Oncology JournalsCurrent Oncology, 2011
- Errata and Retractions in Electronic JournalsJournal of Hospital Librarianship, 2003