High prevalence of articles with image-related problems in animal studies of subarachnoid hemorrhage and low rates of correction by publishers

Scientific progress relies on science's capacity for self-correction. If erroneous articles remain unchallenged in the publication record, they can mislead future research and undermine evidence-based decision-making. All articles included in a systematic review of animal studies on early brain injury after subarachnoid hemorrhage were analyzed for image-related issues. We included 608 articles, of which 243 articles were identified as problematic (40.0%). Of the 243 problematic articles, 55 (22.6%) have been corrected, 7 (2.9%) have received an expression of concern, 5 (2.1%) were marked with the Taylor & Francis under investigation pop-up, and 19 (7.8%) were retracted. In 9 of the 55 corrected articles (16.4%), new problems were found after correction or not all issues were resolved in the correction. Most (n = 213, 87.7%) problematic articles had a corresponding author affiliated to an institute from China. Our results show that the self-correcting mechanisms in science have stalled in this field of research. Our findings provide insight in the prevalence of image-related issues and can help publishers to take appropriate action. We can only uphold science's capacity for self-correction when problematic articles are actively identified by peers, and when publishers take swift and adequate action to repair the scientific record.