Selenium Supplementation and the Effects on Reproductive Outcomes, Biomarkers of Inflammation, and Oxidative Stress in Women with Polycystic Ovary Syndrome

Assessed by RV016 · Research Manager/Fellow

Assessed on 18 Nov 2025

OverallReviewer's overall integrity assessment, derived from all research questions Some concerns

DOI 10.1055/s-0035-1559604 (opens in new tab)

Resource ripekg:research-integrity-assessment/RIPEA90FECE3FA74B7802

5 Research Questions · 3 Evidence Items

Q1.1 — Does the study have an associated retraction?

Automated Assessment:Assessment produced by the automated systemNo

Human Assessment:Assessment by a domain expert reviewer, informed by AI resultsN/A

Rationale: No rationale provided

Q1.2 — Does the study have an associated expression of concern or other relevant post-publication notice?

Automated Assessment:Assessment produced by the automated systemYes

Human Assessment:Assessment by a domain expert reviewer, informed by AI resultsN/A

Rationale: No rationale provided

Supporting Evidence (1)

PubPeer ThreadSource: PubPeer.com — post-publication peer review comments

https://pubpeer.com/publications/3BD4DE5C1C807347CBC0242CE568CF

PubPeer CommentSource: PubPeer.com — a platform for post-publication peer review

Commenter: Andrew GreyDate: 1 May 2021

There are many concerns about the integrity of 172 publications by this research group, including this one. Some of the concerns are published 1. Anaesthesia 2020;75:1683–92, see Supplementary data. This paper is A72 2. Account Res 2020;28:149-61. 3. J Clin Epidemiol 2021;131:22-29. Journals and publishers were notified of these concerns in July 2019. 23 publications have an expression of concern. To our knowledge there has been no public response about any of the concerns. We think these publications are unreliable

Thread: https://pubpeer.com/publications/3BD4DE5C1C807347CBC0242CE568CF (opens in new tab)

Q1.3 — Do other studies by the research team highlight causes for concern?

Automated Assessment:Assessment produced by the automated systemNo

Human Assessment:Assessment by a domain expert reviewer, informed by AI resultsN/A

Rationale: No rationale provided

Q2.2 — Are there concerns relating to the timing or absence of study registration?

Automated Assessment:Assessment produced by the automated systemYes

Human Assessment:Assessment by a domain expert reviewer, informed by AI resultsN/A

Rationale: No rationale provided

Supporting Evidence (2)

Clinical Trial RegistrationSource: Clinical trial registry (e.g. ClinicalTrials.gov, ISRCTN)

Registration ID: IRCT201412295623N33

Registry: IRCT

Registry Link: https://trialsearch.who.int/Trial2.aspx?TrialID=IRCT201412295623N33 (opens in new tab)

Registration Date: 9 Jan 2015

Prospective:Whether the trial was registered before participant recruitment began No

Assessment Rationale:How INSPECT-AI determined the prospective registration status by comparing dates Comparison performed at month level. Registration: 2015-01, LLM Recruitment Start: 2014-10. Deemed retrospective at month level.

Study Design EvidenceDates and timelines extracted by INSPECT-AI from the publication text

Recruitment Start: 10-2014

Recruitment Start Rationale:INSPECT-AI's reasoning for how it identified the recruitment start date Methods: 'from October 2014' is the earliest date mentioned regarding the study, so it is used as the recruitment start date.

Recruitment End: 12-2014

Recruitment End Rationale:INSPECT-AI's reasoning for how it identified the recruitment end date Methods: 'to December 2014' is the latest date mentioned regarding recruitment, so it is used as the recruitment finish date.

Study End: N/A

Study End Rationale:INSPECT-AI's reasoning for how it identified the study end date No explicit study end date is mentioned.

Overall — What is the overall integrity assessment of the study?

Automated Assessment:Assessment produced by the automated systemN/A

Human Assessment:Assessment by a domain expert reviewer, informed by AI resultsSome concerns

Rationale: No rationale provided