Lancet retracts 12-year-old article linking autism to MMR vaccines
Open accessAbstract
Twelve years after publishing a landmark study that turned tens of thousands of parents around the world against the measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccine because of an implied link between vaccinations and autism, The Lancet has retracted the paper. In a statement published on Feb. 2, the
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Wakefield et al. were held guilty of ethical violations because they conducted invasive investigations on children without obtaining necessary ethical clearances.
“Wakefield et al .[ 1 ] were held guilty of ethical violations (they had conducted invasive investigations on the children without obtaining the necessary ethical clearances)”
From The MMR vaccine and autism: Sensation, refutation, retraction, and fraud (2011) · cites this paper as [7]
The Abstract reports that the General Medical Council found Wakefield had acted unethically and showed “callous disregard” for children who underwent invasive tests. It does not say the tests lacked necessary ethical clearances; it also recounts an earlier investigation’s statement that the children had received appropriate ethical scrutiny. (LLM, conf=0.85)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe Lancet completely retracted the Wakefield et al. paper in February 2010, admitting that several elements in the paper were incorrect, contrary to the findings of the earlier investigation.
“The Lancet completely retracted the Wakefield et al .[ 1 ] paper in February 2010, admitting that several elements in the paper were incorrect, contrary to the findings of the earlier investigation.[ 7 ]”
From The MMR vaccine and autism: Sensation, refutation, retraction, and fraud (2011) · cites this paper as [7]
Wakefield et al. were held guilty of scientific misrepresentation because they reported that their sampling was consecutive when, in fact, it was selective.
“and scientific misrepresentation (they reported that their sampling was consecutive when, in fact, it was selective).”
From The MMR vaccine and autism: Sensation, refutation, retraction, and fraud (2011) · cites this paper as [7]
Measles outbreaks in the UK in 2008 and 2009, and pockets of measles in the USA and Canada, were attributed to the nonvaccination of children.
“Measles outbreaks in the UK in 2008 and 2009 as well as pockets of measles in the USA and Canada were attributed to the nonvaccination of children.[ 7 ]”
From The MMR vaccine and autism: Sensation, refutation, retraction, and fraud (2011) · cites this paper as [7]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
de Leeuw, A., Happé, F., & Hoekstra, R. A. (2020) · Autism Research · doi:10.1002/aur.2276 · Cited by 295 · see citing works
The MMR vaccine and autism: Sensation, refutation, retraction, and fraud
Sathyanarayana Rao, T., & Andrade, C. (2011) · Indian Journal of Psychiatry · doi:10.4103/0019-5545.82529 · Cited by 261 · see citing works
“[7] The Wakefield fraud is likely to go down as one of the most serious frauds in medical history.”
Artificial intelligence, drug repurposing and peer review
Levin, J. M., Oprea, T. I., Davidovich, S., Clozel, T., Overington, J. P., Vanhaelen, Q., Cantor, C. R., Bischof, E., & Zhavoronkov, A. (2020) · Nature Biotechnology · doi:10.1038/s41587-020-0686-x · Cited by 79 · see citing works
Intergenerational Metabolic Syndrome and Neuronal Network Hyperexcitability in Autism
Rivell, A., & Mattson, M. P. (2019) · Trends in Neurosciences · doi:10.1016/j.tins.2019.08.006 · Cited by 50 · see citing works
- Authors
- Eggertson, L.
- Corresponding author
- Eggertson, L.
- Venue
- Canadian Medical Association Journal
- Publisher
- CMA Joule Inc.
- Published
- 2010-02-08
- Volume
- 182
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- E199-E200
- ISSN
- 0820-3946 (ISSN-L)
- 1488-2329
- PMC
- PMC2831678
- OpenAlex
- W1967028586
- Cited by
- 249
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 18 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 18 · 2023: 31 · 2022: 38 · 2021: 34 · 2020: 21 · 2019: 28 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 5
- FWCI
- 5.19
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Locations
- Canadian Medical Association Journal (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Health › Vaccine Coverage and Hesitancy
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Academic Publishing and Open Access
- Life Sciences › Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics › Pharmacology › Pharmaceutical industry and healthcare
- Keywords
- MMR vaccine, autism spectrum disorder, retraction, Lancet, measles, mumps, rubella, vaccine safety, parental vaccine hesitancy
- MeSH terms
- Autistic Disorder, Child, Preschool, United Kingdom, Health Status, Humans, Infant, Treatment Refusal, Measles-Mumps-Rubella Vaccine, History, 20th Century, History, 21st Century
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
