Products & safety

Retractions and source updates: corrections, expressions of concern, versions, provenance and evidence reassessment

9 sources · Latest source check 2026-10-14 UTC

On this page

Research can acquire corrections, expressions of concern or retraction notices. NLM distinguishes the original from its linked notice in PubMed. The notice’s text matters: an indexing label alone does not establish why an article was retracted.[2]

Distinguish the action, the record and what remains uncertain

Distinguish the action, the record and what remains uncertain
Category	Meaning	Interpretation boundary
Correction	A linked amendment addressing an error while overall results and conclusions are upheld under PLOS policy	Read which detail changed and use the corrected version[4]
Expression of concern	A warning about serious issues that may be interim or remain unresolved	Under PLOS policy, it does not itself change publication status[4]
Retraction	A notice withdrawing reliance on the publication under the publisher’s stated reasons	Honest error and misconduct can both lead to retraction[4]
Withdrawal	Under Elsevier policy, certain articles in press are withdrawn for premature publication or duplication errors	Terminology and timing vary by publisher[5]
Removal	Exceptional loss of access to article text, with core metadata retained	Different from leaving a marked retracted record accessible[1]
Corrected republication or update	A later version or record linked to the original in indexing	Identify version, date and the changes before relying on it[2]
Page change or access failure	An editorial monitoring signal about a selected URL	Atlas source-watch does not confirm a medical change automatically[9]

Identify the publication and follow its linked notices

NLM links original articles with errata, concern notices, retraction notices and corrected republications. A retracted article and its notice have different publication types. The tag does not separate honest-error from misconduct retractions. Saved PDFs and screenshots can miss later notices, so identify the title and persistent identifier and check the current record. Indexing connects publisher-supplied records; it is not an independent investigation or guarantee that no concern exists.[2]

Notice categories do not carry identical meanings everywhere

Elsevier reserves withdrawal of articles in press for premature publication or duplication arising from editorial or production errors. Extensive errors or policy infringements can instead prompt retraction. An expression of concern remains in the permanent record, with a later notice explaining resolution where possible. Rare removal preserves identifying metadata. These are publisher-specific definitions. Terms used by another journal or preprint server need checking against that service’s own policy and notice.[5]

Read the extent of a warning before making an accusation

PLOS distinguishes corrections preserving overall conclusions from retractions and serious concern notices. An expression of concern can warn during an investigation or document an unresolved case. It neither proves fraud nor assures reliable findings. Retraction can follow honest error or misconduct. Read the affected issues and available evidence. A review containing a questioned article requires assessment of its dependence on that evidence; other findings are not automatically invalidated.[4]

Update metadata is useful, but its presence is not a validity seal

Crossmark displays update information registered by participating publishers, including linked corrections and retractions. Participants commit to accurate, prompt reporting across digital formats. Crossref explicitly says its presence does not itself guarantee reliability. Older or nonparticipating records may lack it. Check the current publisher record and linked notices even when a saved copy has no button. A persistent identifier locates a work; it does not certify methods, conclusions or complete update history.[3]

Status information needs to travel with the work

NISO recommends prominent, accessible status labels and linked notices, including updated PDFs and metadata sent downstream. It distinguishes retraction from rare removal and encourages understandable chronological updates. These safeguards help communicate problems after publication. Databases, archives and publishers can display the same paper differently; multiple URLs are not independent corroborating studies. This publishing recommended practice concerns communicating status, rather than independently assessing every study’s medical implications.[1]

Evidence & uncertainty

NISO’s recommended practice aims to make retraction and concern metadata visible and transferable across services. This communicates publication status without independently establishing a medical claim’s truth or guaranteeing that every copy is current.[1]

Selected-source overview · Independent review pending

Published questions

Is every correction a retraction?

Selected-source overview · Independent review pending. Read the evidence context.

No. PLOS uses corrections where overall results and conclusions remain upheld. Read the affected detail and corrected version; notice types and criteria are publisher-specific.[4]

Evidence behind this answer

Editorial Notes, Corrections, Expressions of Concern, and Retractions
original publisher post publication policy · Date not stated
Selected substantive original official or professional-policy passages inspected on 2026-10-14 UTC; not an independent clinical or legal appraisal · Undated; current policy checked 2026-10-14; Four notice categories, preserved conclusions, EOC status, retraction and exceptional removal