Conectar
Retractions in nursing are often framed as isolated instances of author misconduct or editorial failure. Drawing on recent longitudinal analysis of retracted nursing articles and the Journal Systems Framework (JSF), this Commentary argues that retractions are better understood as system-level signals reflecting differences in editorial capacity, governance, and infrastructure across journal systems.
Between 1997 and 2022, 123 nursing articles were retracted, with persistent concerns related to ethical violations, variability in retraction notice quality, delayed corrective action, and continued post-retraction citation.
Applying the JSF highlights how corrective capacity varies across journal systems, shaping the timeliness, transparency, visibility, and downstream amplification of retraction practices. High-profile retractions in flagship journals may reflect greater corrective capacity rather than uniquely severe ethical failure. Interpreting retractions as indicators of system stress, rather than moral anomalies, shifts attention from individual blame toward strengthening editorial infrastructure.
A systems-aware approach positions nursing scholarship to improve transparency, resilience, and trust as publication volume and complexity continue to grow.
Because nursing scholarship informs clinical care, education, and policy, failures in the scholarly record have implications beyond publishing itself. Greater understanding of retractions and corrective editorial processes can help strengthen trust in evidence used to guide nursing and health care practice.
FreshRSS 