MEDICAL-SCHOOL LIBRARIES HANDLING OF ARTICLES THAT REPORT INVALID SCIENCE

In 1989-90 the authors conducted a nationwide study to examine how academic medical libraries handled articles that report invalid science and to determine the effectiveness of any policies implemented to limit the use of such articles. Ninety-five of the 127 medical school libraries the authors surveyed completed questionnaires analyzing policy and attitude issues. Eighty-four of these libraries manually reviewed the available copies they held of ten retracted articles. Of the 811 copies of the retracted, invalid articles reviewed, 742 (91.5%) were not tagged as being invalid. Seventy-nine percent of the libraries had tagged none of the retracted studies and only 16% had policies for managing articles that report invalid science. Academic librarians reflected a common attitude against perceived library censorship and emphasized the user's role in assuring validity. The nation's medical libraries, at least in part by intent, do not commonly identify or have policies to handle the invalid articles they hold. The authors conclude that biomedical researchers, clinicians, and teachers should not assume published studies held in libraries are inherently valid. The lack of stated policy and the disparate assumptions about the role libraries play in this area may perpetuate the use of invalid articles.