This paper is marked retracted in the scholarly record (OpenAlex). Interpret its findings with caution.
RETRACTION: “Rare tapeworm segments case report and review of literature” by Ahmed Ali Gaffer, Clin Case Rep. 2023;11:e7167 (https://doi.org/10.1002/ccr3.7167)
TL;DR
This paper is a retraction of a case report on a rare tapeworm due to significant scientific inaccuracies.
Contribution
The paper formally retracts a previously published article due to fundamental scientific flaws.
Findings
The original article contains inaccurate information.
An investigation confirmed the scientific flaws in the manuscript.
Abstract
The above article, published online on March 29, 2023 in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com) has been retracted by agreement between the journal's Editor‐in‐Chief, Dr Charles Young, and John Wiley & Sons Ltd. The retraction has been agreed following an investigation into concerns raised by a third party that the article contains several fundamental scientific flaws. The manuscript was evaluated by a senior editor and by an independent scientific expert who both confirmed that important information contained within the manuscript and its conclusions was inaccurate.
Genes, proteins, chemicals, diseases, species, mutations and cell lines named across the full text — each resolved to its canonical identifier and authoritative record.
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsDermatological diseases and infestations
The above article, published online on March 29, 2023 in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com) has been retracted by agreement between the journal's Editor‐in‐Chief, Dr Charles Young, and John Wiley & Sons Ltd. The retraction has been agreed following an investigation into concerns raised by a third party that the article contains several fundamental scientific flaws. The manuscript was evaluated by a senior editor and by an independent scientific expert who both confirmed that important information contained within the manuscript and its conclusions was inaccurate.