Richard Van Noorden

@richvn
1.9K Followers
789 Following
439 Posts
Features editor, Nature.
r.vannoorden[[at]]nature[[dot]]com
richardvannoorden⟦at⟧protonmail⟦dot⟧com
Toots are searchable via tootfinder.
Verified byhttps://fedified.com
VERIFIED JOURNALISThttps://www.verifiedjournalist.org/people/@[email protected]
Richard Van NoordenApr 16, 2025

What's the most cited research published in the 21st century?

Which are the most cited papers of all time?

And what decades-old science studies are still heavily referenced today?

Answers to all these and more in a series of features in Nature on the research that makes the top of the citation charts.

(Long-time readers will remember a 'top 100 papers' that Nature ran in 2014 -- as part of this package this is updated to the present day)

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-025-01125-9

Exclusive: the most-cited papers of the twenty-first century

A Nature analysis reveals the 25 highest-cited papers published this century and explores why they are breaking records.

Richard Van NoordenMar 25, 2025
David WhittleMar 20, 2025
The biggest machine in science: inside the fight to build the next giant particle collider
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-025-00793-x
The biggest machine in science: inside the fight to build the next giant particle collider

The European physics laboratory CERN is planning to build a mega collider by 2070. Critics say the plan could lead to its ruin.

Richard Van NoordenNov 15, 2024
Show threadJeff JarvisNov 15, 2024
Any critics are at risk, chapter 2.
Scientific American editor steps down after election comments draw backlash https://www.washingtonpost.com/style/media/2024/11/14/scientific-american-laura-helmuth-quits/
Scientific American editor steps down after election comments draw backlash

Criticism of Laura Helmuth’s comments increased after X owner and Trump ally Elon Musk weighed in.

The Washington Post
Richard Van NoordenNov 13, 2024

"AI tools could help scientists to produce high-quality reviews, but might also fuel the rapid generation of substandard ones".

Great overview by Helen Pearson in Nature of current efforts to have AI create review articles from the scientific literature.
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-024-03676-9

Can AI review the scientific literature — and figure out what it all means?

Artificial intelligence could help speedily summarize research. But it comes with risks.

Richard Van NoordenOct 23, 2024
Show threadEgon Willigh☮gen 🟥Oct 23, 2024
@rmounce @richvn indeed! they are just average numbers, exactly like the journal impact factor
Richard Van NoordenOct 22, 2024
Which scientific publishers/journals are worst affected by fraudulent or dubious research papers, and which have done least to clean up their portfolio?
A science-integrity startup called Argos says it has answers.
There are quite a few integrity tools now that look for red flags in papers, but this is the first to go public with what it's finding across journals and publishers.
Here's my exclusive look at their figures.
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-024-03427-w
Journals with high rates of suspicious papers flagged by science-integrity start-up

Scitility’s tool Argos identifies work whose authors have a record of misconduct.

Richard Van NoordenDec 14, 2023
Jeffrey PerkelDec 14, 2023
This year's Nature 10 collection @Nature includes 10 people who helped shape science -- and one AI. Check out our profile of ChatGPT, by @richvn & Richard Webb. https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-023-03930-6
ChatGPT and science: the AI system was a force in 2023 — for good and bad

The poster child for generative AI software is a startling human mimic. It represents a potential new era in research, but brings risks.

Richard Van NoordenDec 12, 2023
CassieDec 12, 2023
I used Duck Duck Go for the first time a few years ago and ended up stopping because its results were terrible, but I re-tried it again when news about Google's new trackers broke and it is a million times better - it's very usable now and often provides better search results than Google does. I recommend it.
Richard Van NoordenDec 12, 2023
Milestone: 2023 is the first year with more than 10,000 research paper retractions -- smashing previous records. More than 8,000 of these came from Hindawi (mostly from 'special issues'). Total retractions now >50,000. My analysis for Nature.
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-023-03974-8
More than 10,000 research papers were retracted in 2023 — a new record

The number of articles being retracted rose sharply this year. Integrity experts say that this is only the tip of the iceberg.

Richard Van NoordenDec 11, 2023
"...ill-informed use of AI software is driving a deluge of papers with claims that cannot be replicated, or that are wrong or useless in practical terms."
by @philipcball in Nature.
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-023-03817-6
Is AI leading to a reproducibility crisis in science?

Scientists worry that ill-informed use of artificial intelligence is driving a deluge of unreliable or useless research.