Suspected distortion of citations in high-impact cancer journals
- 1School of Public Health & Social Work, Queensland University of Technology, Kelvin Grove, Australia
Abstract
Research and scholarship are shaped by article citations, which underpin the communication of ideas, assignment of credit, journal impact factors, and author career progression. Given their key influence on author and journal metrics, citations can be intentionally manipulated to inflate the reputation of journals and researchers. Paper mills, unethical organisations that produce and sell manuscripts and publishing services, may also be manipulating citations, but the extent of this manipulation is unknown. Here, we show that molecular cancer articles sharing features with retracted papers from paper mills display citation patterns that suggest systematic inflation. These articles were published in journals in the top decile of journal rankings. Suspected paper mill articles received 50 to 100% more citations than other papers 1 to 3 years after publication, while paradoxically attracting fewer readers and online accesses. Suspected paper mill articles also cited - and were cited by - other suspected paper mill articles, which frequently appeared in journals previously reported as paper mill targets. Citations from suspected paper mill articles measurably inflated journal citation metrics. These findings suggest that paper mills inflate the citation metrics of supported publications and affected journals at scale. This widespread manipulation of citation metrics may amplify unreliable findings, slowing scientific progress and spurring unreasonable citation benchmarks for research articles, journals and authors. Our findings point to measurable signatures of citation manipulation that could support article- and journal-level screening.
Related
- Open access route and citation impact in orthopaedic research: A comparison of Gold/hybrid, Green, and Bronze open access within ten high-impact subscription-based journals
- An Atypical Abdominal Presentation of Pancreatic Panniculitis in a Patient With Suspected Pancreatic Cancer: A Case Report
- Machine learning-assisted serum Raman spectroscopy for risk stratification in men with suspected prostate cancer: a retrospective proof-of-concept study
- SCORES (Selection of Clinical Observations for Risk Evaluation Scores): Impact of Heart Rate Selection on Simplified Geneva Score Performance in Suspected Pulmonary Embolism
- Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Intestinal Parasitic Infection Positivity Rates Among Clinically Suspected Patients at a Tertiary Centre in Northern India: A Four-Year Retrospective Analysis
BibTeX
@misc{scancar2026suspected,
title = {{Suspected distortion of citations in high-impact cancer journals}},
author = {B. Scancar and J. A. Byrne and D. Causeur and A. G. Barnett},
howpublished = {bioRxiv},
year = {2026},
month = may,
doi = {10.64898/2026.05.25.727627},
url = {https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.05.25.727627v2},
note = {CC BY},
}
RIS
TY - UNPB
TI - Suspected distortion of citations in high-impact cancer journals
AU - B. Scancar
AU - J. A. Byrne
AU - D. Causeur
AU - A. G. Barnett
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/05/25
PB - bioRxiv
DO - 10.64898/2026.05.25.727627
UR - https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.05.25.727627v2
AB - Research and scholarship are shaped by article citations, which underpin the communication of ideas, assignment of credit, journal impact factors, and author career progression. Given their key influence on author and journal metrics, citations can be intentionally manipulated to inflate the reputation of journals and researchers. Paper mills, unethical organisations that produce and sell manuscripts and publishing services, may also be manipulating citations, but the extent of this manipulation is unknown. Here, we show that molecular cancer articles sharing features with retracted papers from paper mills display citation patterns that suggest systematic inflation. These articles were published in journals in the top decile of journal rankings. Suspected paper mill articles received 50 to 100% more citations than other papers 1 to 3 years after publication, while paradoxically attracting fewer readers and online accesses. Suspected paper mill articles also cited - and were cited by - other suspected paper mill articles, which frequently appeared in journals previously reported as paper mill targets. Citations from suspected paper mill articles measurably inflated journal citation metrics. These findings suggest that paper mills inflate the citation metrics of supported publications and affected journals at scale. This widespread manipulation of citation metrics may amplify unreliable findings, slowing scientific progress and spurring unreasonable citation benchmarks for research articles, journals and authors. Our findings point to measurable signatures of citation manipulation that could support article- and journal-level screening.
ER -