"The study, published on 17 November by researchers from New York University, Abu Dhabi, combed through more than 200 million scientific papers to identify seve

"The study, published on 17 November by researchers from New York University, Abu Dhabi, combed through more than 200 million scientific papers to identify several million mentor-mentee pairs, then tracked their co-authorships and citation records to evaluate the impact of mentorship. Their conclusions, including a finding that “current diversity policies promoting female-female mentorships, as well-intended as they may be, could hinder the careers of women,” angered many researchers. Critics attacked both the study’s conclusions and the methods used to reach them. In a retraction notice published today, the authors wrote that they recognized the validity of some of the complaints, including concerns about “the use of co-authorship as a measure of mentorship.” " Wow, they used co-authorship == mentorship and from that assumption concluded that women-women mentor-mentee relationships result in worse outcomes? That's one hell of a reach. How did this make it past peer review?