The Landscape of problematic papers in the field of non-coding RNA

In recent years, the surge in retractions has been accompanied by numerous papers receiving comments that raise concerns about their reliability. The prevalence of problematic papers undermines the reliability of scientific research and threatens the foundation of evidence-based medicine. In this study,we focus on the field of non-coding RNA(ncRNA) as a case study to explore the typical characteristics of problematic papers from various perspectives, aiming to provide insights for addressing large-scale fraudulent publications. Research on under-investigated ncRNAs is more likely to yield problematic papers. These problematic papers often exhibit significant textual similarity, and many others sharing this similarity also display suspicious instances of image duplication. Healthcare institutions are particularly prone to publishing problematic papers, especially those with a low publication volume. Most problematic papers are found in a limited number of journals, and many journals inadequately address the commented papers. Our findings suggest that numerous problematic papers may still remain unidentified. The revealed characteristics offer valuable insights for formulating strategies to address the issue of fraudulent papers at scale.