Independent validation of induced overexpression efficiency across 242 experiments shows a success rate of 39%

Although numerous studies containing induced gene expression have already been published, independent authentication of their results has not yet been performed. Here, we utilized available transcriptomic data to validate the achieved efficiency in overexpression studies. Microarray data of experiments containing cell lines with induced overexpression in one or more genes were analyzed. All together 342 studies were processed, these include 242 different genes overexpressed in 184 cell lines. The final database includes 4,755 treatment-control sample pairs. Successful gene induction (fold change induction over 1.44) was validated in 39.3% of all genes at p < 0.05. Number of repetitions within a study (p < 0.0001) and type of used vector (p = 0.023) had significant impact on successful overexpression efficacy. In summary, over 60% of studies failed to deliver a reproducible overexpression. To achieve higher efficiency, robust and strict study design with multi-level quality control will be necessary

CORRIGENDUM / ERRATUM / RETRACTION

RETRACTION TO: Mila, R., T. (2016). The Assessment of Critical Thinking Skill for Early Age Children Based on Criterion Referenced and Norm Referenced Interpretations. TARBIYA: Journal Of Education In Muslim Society, 3(1), 77-89. doi:10.15408/tjems.v3i1.339. This article has been retracted by Publisher based on the following reason: The Editor of Tarbiya Journal found the double publication in the article publishing due to article's content similarity published in TEKNOLOGI PENDIDIKAN Vol 5, No. 2 (2016) URL: http://jurnal.ppsuika.ac.id/index.php/TEK/article/view/495. Titled” THE ASSESSMENT OF CRITICAL THINKING SKILL FOR EARLY AGE CHILDREN BASED ON CRITERION REFERENCED AND NORM REFERENCED INTERPRETATIONS” with the same author who is Rodhoty Taza Mila. Based on clarification, Author of the article have admitted that she has published the same article published in TEKNOLOGI PENDIDIKAN Vol 5, No. 2 (2016). One of the conditions of submission of paper for publication in this journal is that authors declare explicitly that their work is original and has not appeared in a publication elsewhere. Re-use of any data should be appropriately cited. As such this article represents a severe abuse of the scientific publishing system. The scientific community takes a very strong view on this matter and apologies are offered to readers of the journal that this was not detected during the submission process

Retratação

A Equipe Editorial do periódico RDBCI: Revista Digital de Biblioteconomia e Ciência da Informação comunica a publicação formal de Retratação para extração do artigo: MIRA, B. S. de; OLIVEIRA, C. G. de; SHINTAKU, M. Percurso editorial e a visibilidade das publicações científicas : um estudo de caso exploratório sobre o periódico Tchê Química. RDBCI: Revista Digital de Biblioteconomia e Ciência da Informação, Campinas, SP, v. 20, e022011, 2022. DOI: 10.20396/rdbci.v20i00.8668225. Disponível em: https://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/rdbci/article/view/8668225. Acesso em: 25 ago. 2025. Desde que foi comprovada o uso indevido de metodologia e outros aspectos éticos que aferiram informações de um dos editores estudos no artigo. Após análise formal e jurídica, decidiu pela extração do artigo da revista.  The editorial team of the journal RDBCI: Revista Digital de Biblioteconomia e Ciência da Informação (Digital Journal of Library Science and Information Science) announces the formal publication of a retraction for the removal of the article: MIRA, B. S. de; OLIVEIRA, C. G. de; SHINTAKU, M. Percurso editorial e a visibilidade das publicações científicas : um estudo de caso exploratório sobre o periódico Tchê Química. RDBCI: Revista Digital de Biblioteconomia e Ciência da Informação, Campinas, SP, v. 20, e022011, 2022. DOI: 10.20396/rdbci.v20i00.8668225.  Available at: https://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/rdbci/article/view/8668225. Accessed on: Aug. 25, 2025. Since the misuse of methodology and other ethical aspects that assessed information from one of the editors of the article was proven. After formal and legal analysis, it was decided to remove the article from the journal