Science of retracted science: a citation analysis of the arts and humanities domain

In the scholarly publishing domain, a retraction is raised when a specific publication is considered erroneous by the venue in which it appeared after it was published. The aim of this work is uncovering new insights and learn new important information to help us understand the retraction phenomenon in the arts and humanities domain. Our investigation is based on a methodology defined using quantitative and qualitative measures derived from previous studies in the transdisciplinary research field of “science of science” (SciSci). The designed methodology takes into account a general case of retraction and applies a citation analysis based on five phases. Citations to retracted publications (before and after their retraction) are gathered and characterized with a set of attributes, including general metadata and information extracted from citing entities’ full text. The annotated characteristics are further considered for a statistical and a textual analysis (i.e., a topic modeling analysis). The contribution of this thesis is grounded by addressing the following research questions: (RQ1) How did scholarly research cite retracted humanities publications before and after their retraction? (RQ2) Did all the humanities areas behave similarly concerning the retraction phenomenon? (RQ3) What are the main differences and similarities in the retraction dynamics between the humanities domain and the STEM disciplines? RQ1 and RQ2 are addressed by tuning and applying the methodology on the analysis of the retracted publications in the humanities domain. RQ3 is addressed on two levels, i.e., considering and comparing: (L1) the outcomes of the past studies on the retraction in STEM, and (L2) the results obtained from an analysis of a retraction case in STEM using the defined methodology.

Validation of a new method for human nerve decellularization: toward a new tool in peripheral nerve reconstructive surgery.

Defects of the peripheral nervous system are extremely frequent in trauma and surgeries and have high socioeconomic costs. In case of peripheral nerve injury, the first approach is primary neurorrhaphy, which is direct nerve repair with epineural microsutures of the two stumps. However, this is not feasible in case of stump retraction or in case of tissue loss (gap > 2 cm), where the main surgical options are autologous grafts, allogenic grafts, or nerve conduits. While the gold standard is the autograft, it has disadvantages related to its harvesting, with an inevitable donor site morbidity and functional deficit. Fresh nerve allografts have therefore become a viable alternative option, but they require immunosuppression, which is often contraindicated. Acellular Nerve Allografts (ANA) represent a valid alternative, they do not need immunosuppression and appear to be safe and effective based on recent studies. The purpose of this study is to propose and develop an innovative method of nerve decellularization (Rizzoli method), conforming to cleanroom requirements in order to perform the direct tissue manipulation step and the nerve decellularization process within five hours, so as to accelerate the detachment of myelin and cellular debris, without detrimental effects on nerve architecture. In this study, the safety and the efficacy of the new method are evaluated in vitro and in vivo by histological, immunohistochemical, and histomorphometric studies in rabbits and humans. The new method is rapid, safe, and cheaper if compared with available commercial ANAs. The present study shows that the method, previously optimized in vitro and in vivo on animal model presented by our group, can be applied on human nerve samples. This work represents the first step in providing a novel, safe, and inexpensive tool for use by European tissue banks to democratize the use of nerve tissue transplantation for nerve injury reconstruction.