Home Browse RETRACTION: How blockchain-timestamped protocols could improve the...
ALL Metrics
-
Views
-
Downloads
Get PDF
Get XML
Cite
Export
Track
▬
✚
Retraction

RETRACTION:  How blockchain-timestamped protocols could improve the trustworthiness of medical science

[version 1; peer review: not peer reviewed]
Greg Irving1, John Holden2
Greg Irving1, John Holden2
PUBLISHED 08 Jun 2017
Author details Author details
OPEN PEER REVIEW
REVIEWER STATUS AWAITING PEER REVIEW

At the request of the authors Greg Irving and John Holden, the article titled “How blockchain-timestamped protocols could improve the trustworthiness of medical science” has been retracted from F1000Research. The authors have taken this decision after considering the methodological concerns raised by a peer reviewer during the post-publication open peer review process. As the methodology has been deemed to be unreliable, the article is now retracted. This applies to all three versions of the article: Irving G and Holden J. How blockchain-timestamped protocols could improve the trustworthiness of medical science [version 1; referees: 2 approved]. F1000Research 2016, 5:222 (doi: 10.12688/f1000research.8114.1) Irving G and Holden J. How blockchain-timestamped protocols could improve the trustworthiness of medical science [version 2; referees: 3 approved]. F1000Research 2016, 5:222 (doi: 10.12688/f1000research.8114.2) Irving G and Holden J. How blockchain-timestamped protocols could improve the trustworthiness of medical science [version 3; referees: 3 approved, 1 not approved]. F1000Research 2017, 5:222 (doi: 10.12688/f1000research.8114.3).
Associated Method Article Greg Irving, John Holden » How blockchain-timestamped protocols could improve the trustworthiness of medical science, F1000Research 2017, 5:222 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.8114.3)
Corresponding author: Greg Irving
Competing interests: No competing interests were disclosed.
Grant information: The author(s) declared that no grants were involved in supporting this work.
Copyright:  © 2017 Irving G and Holden J. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
How to cite: Irving G and Holden J. RETRACTION:  How blockchain-timestamped protocols could improve the trustworthiness of medical science [version 1; peer review: not peer reviewed]. F1000Research 2017, 6:805 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.11888.1) First published: 08 Jun 2017, 6:805 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.11888.1) Latest published: 08 Jun 2017, 6:805 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.11888.1)

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Version 1
VERSION 1 PUBLISHED 08 Jun 2017
Comment
Author details Author details
Competing interests
Grant information
Article Versions (1)
Copyright
Download
 
Export To
metrics
Views Downloads
F1000Research - -
PubMed Central
Data from PMC are received and updated monthly.
 - -
Citations
SEE MORE DETAILS
CITE
how to cite this article
Irving G and Holden J. RETRACTION:  How blockchain-timestamped protocols could improve the trustworthiness of medical science [version 1; peer review: not peer reviewed]. F1000Research 2017, 6:805 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.11888.1)
NOTE: If applicable, it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article.
track
receive updates on this article
Track an article to receive email alerts on any updates to this article.

Current Reviewer Status:
NOT PEER REVIEWED
NOT PEER REVIEWED

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Version 1
VERSION 1 PUBLISHED 08 Jun 2017
Comment

Not Peer Reviewed

This is a retraction notice and therefore does not require peer review.

Comments on this article

All Comments(0)

Add a comment
Sign up for content alerts

Browse by related subjects

    Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article:
    Approved - the paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested
    Approved with reservations - A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit.
    Not approved - fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions
    Sign In
    If you've forgotten your password, please enter your email address below and we'll send you instructions on how to reset your password.

    The email address should be the one you originally registered with F1000.
    Email address not valid, please try again

    You registered with F1000 via Google, so we cannot reset your password.

    To sign in, please click here.

    If you still need help with your Google account password, please click here.

    You registered with F1000 via Facebook, so we cannot reset your password.

    To sign in, please click here.

    If you still need help with your Facebook account password, please click here.

    Code not correct, please try again
    Email us for further assistance.
    Server error, please try again.