Case Studies
Real retractions, re-reviewed.
We take published papers that journals later retracted for manuscript-visible problems, run them through the standard PeerReviewAI review, and publish the results — the official record, the full unedited review, and an honest accounting of what it caught and what it missed.
Editorial policy
How we choose cases.
- We only cover published retractions whose public notices document problems visible in the manuscript itself — fabricated or unverifiable references, claims unsupported by their sources. We avoid retractions that are contested, litigated, or attributable to honest error.
- We never name authors in our case studies or posts; review artifacts are published unedited. The story is the system, not a person.
- Every case study reports what the review caught and what it could not catch. If a review misses something manuscript-visible, we publish that too.
- Reviews are run unedited on the published version, after retraction, and are never silently updated. They are historical artifacts of the engine version noted on each page; dated revisits may be appended, never substituted.
- We never publish reviews of customer manuscripts. Customer work is processed under Zero Data Retention and never stored.
Case files
More case studies are in progress.