1 The retractions came only a few months after BioMed Central.

But that move may not be enough, as the publisher Hindawi discovered this past spring. Although Hindawi doesn’t let authors suggest reviewers for their manuscripts, it decided to examine the peer-review records for manuscripts submitted in 2013 and 2014 for possible fraud. The peer-review procedure found in Hindawi’s journals depends generally on the expertise of its editorial board members and the guest editors of special issues, who are responsible for supervising the overview of submitted manuscripts.5 Because the peer reviewers selected by the guest editors weren’t subject to any kind of independent verification, editors themselves could undermine the procedure in much the same way that authors or third-party agencies have done somewhere else: by creating fake reviewer identities and addresses that they submitted positive reviews endorsing publication.In the fibrinolysis group, 4 individuals were dropped to follow-up, and 1 individual withdrew consent. In the primary PCI group, 2 individuals were lost to follow-up. Most patients underwent randomization in an ambulance establishing. Baseline characteristics were equivalent, except that earlier congestive heart failing was more regular in sufferers in the primary PCI group . The median time delay from the onset of symptoms to first medical contact and randomization was similar in both study groups. The median moments between indicator onset and start of reperfusion therapy were 100 minutes and 178 a few minutes, respectively . As expected, the median period from randomization to angiography was in the fibrinolysis group than in the principal PCI group longer, with a delay of 2.2 hours for the 36 percent of individuals who required rescue or urgent intervention and 17 hours for the remaining 64 percent of patients.