{"id":549075,"date":"2026-07-14T11:12:15","date_gmt":"2026-07-14T11:12:15","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ie\/549075\/"},"modified":"2026-07-14T11:12:15","modified_gmt":"2026-07-14T11:12:15","slug":"a-student-claimed-to-have-a-ph-d-in-at-least-eight-letters-to-journals-two-have-been-retracted-retraction-watch","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ie\/549075\/","title":{"rendered":"A student claimed to have a Ph.D. in at least eight letters to journals. Two have been retracted.\u00a0 \u2013 Retraction Watch"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

This past year, Zhihao Lei has signed his name to at least 35 letters to the editor of medical journals, weighing in on topics from ICU care to breast cancer. In eight of them, he identified himself as a Ph.D. at Cornell University, although he held only a bachelor\u2019s degree at the time.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Two of those letters, one in JAMA Oncology<\/a> and another in JAMA Pediatrics<\/a>, were retracted last month after Lei himself acknowledged in the notices he had \u201cfalsely reported\u201d his degree as a Ph.D. and implying he was an employee at the university when he was not. When he published the letters, he held a bachelor\u2019s degree and was enrolled at Cornell as a master\u2019s student in the School of Professional Studies. The retractions relate to Lei\u2019s false credentials and not the content of the letters. In at least six others Lei published in the past year, he also signs off as a Ph.D., although none of these has been corrected or retracted.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Lei, who has served as a peer reviewer<\/a> at Cancer Gene Therapy and the British Medical Journal, said he didn\u2019t understand why Retraction Watch was interested in this case. \u201cI am not entirely clear about the purpose of your inquiry,\u201d he wrote in an email, adding that the retractions involved only author metadata and credentials, not fabrications, falsification or plagiarism.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Many of the letter titles follow a formula typical of LLMs (ie. \u2018\u201cMeasurement or Judgment?\u201d Reconsidering Data Quality and Inference in EudraVigilance\u2019 and \u2018\u201cEfficacy or illusion?\u201d Interpreting null results in the rifaximin trial\u2019). Lei did not respond to our questions about whether he used AI to generate the letters.\u00a0<\/p>\n

\u201cThere are countless other retractions involving far more serious issues,\u201d he told us. \u201cI therefore find it difficult to understand why this relatively minor issue has attracted you [sic] such sustained attention, and I am concerned about the basis and intent of the inquiry.\u201d<\/p>\n

He said he had proactively notified the journals, including the others where his credentials are still listed as a Ph.D., once he became aware of the error, and that JAMA had applied \u201ca stricter policy\u201d than other publications by opting for a retraction over a correction.<\/p>\n

Lei also declined to share his correspondence with the editors and publishers informing them of the issue, calling it confidential. \u201cI do not believe that declining to disclose private correspondence should be treated as evidence of wrongdoing or used as a basis for speculation,\u201d he wrote.\u00a0<\/p>\n

\u201cI am a student, and this situation is already personally difficult and embarrassing,\u201d he added. \u201cI respectfully ask that you not pursue this matter further.\u201d<\/p>\n

Lei did not explain how he became aware of the issue, but maintained that the credentials were \u201creported incorrectly by mistake.\u201d The retraction notices in both JAMA journals are nearly identical, and attribute the push for retraction to Lei, told from his point of view rather than the editors. \u201cTo maintain the accuracy of the scholarly record, I have requested retraction of this Letter to the Editor,\u201d they both read.\u00a0<\/p>\n

The other letters that include his false Ph.D. credentials remain uncorrected. They include a letter <\/a>in the Journal of Surgical Research addressing<\/a> a study about rib fractures, a comment on ICU-decision<\/a> making in Chest, a letter to the<\/a> Journal of the National Cancer Institute on Medicare Advantage plans, a comment in<\/a> Integrative Cancer Therapies on a drug trial for breast cancer, a letter to<\/a> Annals of Emergency Medicine on low back pain, and another letter addressing<\/a> a study on critical illnesses in Critical Care Medicine.\u00a0<\/p>\n

In total, Lei published at least 35 letters to the editor in the past year, taking issue with the methodology in a broad spectrum of health-related research. We\u2019ve previously reported on an author who published more than 500<\/a> letters in one year.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Elsevier, which publishes the Journal of Surgical Research and Chest, said they could not comment while an investigation is ongoing. A spokesperson for Sage, which publishes Integrative Cancer Therapies, said the publisher was \u201creviewing the case to assess whether further action is required.\u201d The Journal of the National Cancer Institute has an ongoing ethics and integrity investigation related to Lei\u2019s letter.\u00a0<\/p>\n

The other journals, JAMA and Cornell University have not responded to requests for comment.<\/p>\n

Like Retraction Watch? You can make a\u00a0tax-deductible contribution to support our work<\/a>, follow us\u00a0on X<\/a> or Bluesky<\/a>, like us\u00a0on Facebook<\/a>, follow us on LinkedIn<\/a>, add us to your\u00a0RSS reader<\/a>, or subscribe to our\u00a0daily digest<\/a>. If you find a retraction that\u2019s\u00a0not in our database<\/a>, you can\u00a0let us know here<\/a>. For comments or feedback, email us at\u00a0[email\u00a0protected]<\/a>.<\/p>\n

\n\tRelated\n<\/p>\n

\t