>> A lead author of the paper, biomathematician Maik Pietzner at the University of Cambridge, said that although the paper was submitted after the retractions o

>> A lead author of the paper, biomathematician Maik Pietzner at the University of Cambridge, said that although the paper was submitted after the retractions occurred, it was written beforehand, and “the current pandemic requires immediate response.” However, the paper was published 4 months after its submission. Particularly during the pandemic, the peer review / publishing process has become so slow in some cases that it's easily understandable to have not removed a citation, or to have had a year go by before publication. 1) I can't think of too many times that I've gone back to the source to read a paper. I download the PDF and never go back the website. How would I know about the retraction? 2) Changes to the text can require another round of review (possibly adds two months?). 3) Authors are generally against issuing corrections post-publication since the box that's added to the top of the paper looks similar to a retraction [0]. 4) Authors are busy or lazy. >> Given that no editor or reviewer caught the problem, she said, “I plan to discuss with the staff incorporating such screening into manuscript processing.” Shouldn't it be the responsibility of the publisher to add a notification to papers that cited a retracted paper? ("Be wary of things relating to ref #32.") We pay Nature Communications (cited in the article) ~$5000 to publish [1]... this should already be done for you. [0] e.g., this PNAS paper: https://www.pnas.org/content/116/32/15877 https://www.pnas.org/content/116/32/15877. Why not make the retraction notification a bright red box? [1] https://www.nature.com/ncomms/about/article-processing-charges https://www.nature.com/ncomms/about/article-processing-charg...