Incidence and evolution of retracted publications according to the sources used: A meta-analysis comparison with RetractBASE

The aim of this article is to evaluate the coverage of RetractBASE (retractbase.csic.es), a new open search engine specialised in retracted literature, in comparison with the findings of previous studies. The objective is to show how the use of different and varied sources positively influences the detection and identification of retracted publications, providing a more accurate and thorough view. The results show that RetractBASE exceeds the coverage of retracted publications reported in previous studies, particularly with regard to longitudinal trends. The findings also identify more publications from Asian countries and a better disciplinary balance, with a higher proportion of Social Sciences and Physical Sciences publications. These results have important implications for the understanding of the correction of science, because they indicate a higher incidence than that estimated in previous studies. This comparative analysis also demonstrates that drawing on multiple data sources increases the reliability and robustness of the sample.