Joachim Boldt

Further retractions continued more than a decade after the scandal began. In July 2026, Retraction Watch recorded approximately 240 retractions attributed to Boldt, placing him at the top of its ranking.

State of the evidence

Documented

Attribution

Directly implicated

Boldt was a prominent figure in the debate over colloids and hydroxyethyl starch. When the underlying studies were retracted, some of his reviews supporting HES safety were themselves retracted because they relied on research now considered unreliable.

State of the evidence

Documented

Attribution

Directly implicated

A 1996 study on albumin and HES was retracted after the Giessen investigation provided the journal with evidence of data manipulation, extending the scandal beyond the more recent Ludwigshafen studies.

Legal status — source text

1996 paper retracted for data manipulation

Attribution

Directly implicated

The Klinikum Ludwigshafen investigation concluded that Boldt's studies did not comply with required standards, that at least ten contained false data and that there was clear evidence of procedural irregularities and misconduct.

State of the evidence

Documented

Attribution

Directly implicated

Eighteen journals announced the retraction of 88 Boldt papers linked to studies for which required ethical approvals could not be established. Several journals subsequently published formal retraction notices.

State of the evidence

Documented

Legal status — source text

88 publications targeted for retraction

Attribution

Directly implicated

The University of Giessen determined that Boldt no longer had the right to use the title of "außerplanmäßiger Professor" because he had not fulfilled his statutory teaching obligations.

State of the evidence

Documented

Attribution

Directly implicated

Giessen's standing committee considered scientific misconduct by Boldt established and recommended, among other measures, formal retraction of a publication it had examined and academic consequences.

State of the evidence

Documented

Attribution

Directly implicated

A study comparing albumin with hydroxyethyl starch for priming cardiopulmonary bypass circuits triggered the scandal. The investigation found no ethical approval or written consent, no patient or laboratory data, and reported use of albumin that the hospital had not supplied for that indication since 1999.

Attribution

Directly implicated

After the Boldt case came to light, the medical authorities and Ludwigshafen hospital were unable to verify ethics committee approvals for 88 single-centre publications produced after his arrival in 1996.

Attribution

Directly implicated