CONTROVERSIA Help us
Portrait not available

Nationality American — Anaesthesiology / postoperative pain / scientific fraud / funding fraud

Scott Reuben

Science, medicine and health

Documented profile covering 8 controversies, including “2009–2022: continued citation of retracted papers long after fraud was exposed” and “February 2010: guilty plea to healthcare fraud”.

Are you concerned? Right of reply

Profile No. 1967 · Updated on 13 October 2026

8Documented controversies
8Sources
1 followed by a conviction

§ Legal statuses reflect the documented sources as of the date shown; they replace neither court decisions nor the presumption of innocence. Counts are not a rating. Methodology

I. Documented controversies

01

2009–2022

2009–2022: continued citation of retracted papers long after fraud was exposed

No legal proceedings

Bibliometric analyses showed that Reuben's retracted papers continued to be cited for years, often without explicit acknowledgement of their retraction, prolonging contamination of the scientific literature.

State of the evidence
Documented
Attribution
Indirectly implicated

Sources · 2

  1. [1]
    NatureRetractions are increasing, but not enoughAcademic publicationHigh reliability
  2. [2]
    PubMed / AnesthesiologySusceptibility to fraud in systematic reviews: lessons from the Reuben caseAcademic publicationHigh reliability

Last verified: 14 September 2026

Add to this entry

Case · 3 documented stages

February 2010: guilty plea to healthcare fraud

Conviction
02

22 February 2010

February 2010: guilty plea to healthcare fraud

Conviction

Before the federal court in Massachusetts, Reuben pleaded guilty to one count of healthcare fraud relating to the falsification of funded and published medical studies.

State of the evidence
Established by a court
Attribution
Accused

Sources · 1

  1. [1]
    U.S. Department of JusticeAnesthesiologist Pleads Guilty to Health Care FraudProsecutor's statementVery high reliability

Last verified: 14 September 2026

Add to this entry

03

24 June 2010

June 2010: six months in prison, three years' supervised release, fine, restitution and forfeiture

Conviction

The federal judge sentenced him to six months in prison, three years of supervised release, a $5,000 fine, $361,932 in restitution and $50,000 in forfeiture.

State of the evidence
Documented
Attribution
Accused

Sources · 1

  1. [1]
    U.S. Department of JusticeAnesthesiologist Sentenced on Health Care Fraud ChargeProsecutor's statementVery high reliability

Last verified: 14 September 2026

Add to this entry

08

2005

2005: Pfizer-funded celecoxib study never conducted but presented as clinical research

Conviction

Reuben had received funding and medication from Pfizer to study celecoxib in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. The federal case established that the study had never actually been conducted, although a paper presenting it as research had been published.

Attribution
Directly implicated

Sources · 2

  1. [1]
    U.S. Department of JusticeAnesthesiologist Pleads Guilty to Health Care FraudProsecutor's statementVery high reliability
  2. [2]
    U.S. Department of JusticeAnesthesiologist Sentenced on Health Care Fraud ChargeProsecutor's statementVery high reliability

Last verified: 14 September 2026

Add to this entry

04

années 1990–2009

1990s–2000s: fraudulent findings incorporated into reviews, meta-analyses and multimodal analgesia recommendations

No legal proceedings

Reuben's papers influenced systematic reviews, narrative reviews, presentations and recommendations concerning postoperative pain management. Subsequent analyses showed that some conclusions would have changed after his data were removed.

Attribution
Directly implicated

Sources · 2

  1. [1]
    PubMed / Der AnaesthesistWhat can we learn from the Scott Reuben case? Scientific misconduct in anaesthesiologyAcademic publicationHigh reliability
  2. [2]
    PubMed / AnesthesiologySusceptibility to fraud in systematic reviews: lessons from the Reuben caseAcademic publicationHigh reliability

Last verified: 14 September 2026

Add to this entry

05

2008–March 2009

2008–2009: irregularities discovered during institutional review and Baystate investigation

Investigation

Irregularities, particularly the absence of ethical approval for reported research, triggered a wider investigation. Baystate subsequently concluded that extensive fraud had occurred and notified the journals concerned.

State of the evidence
Documented
Attribution
Directly implicated

Sources · 2

  1. [1]
    The BMJProminent celecoxib researcher admits fabricating data in 21 articlesPressVery high reliability
  2. [2]
    NatureHospital investigation reveals long-running fraudPressVery high reliability

Last verified: 14 September 2026

Add to this entry

06

2009

2009: wave of retractions and questions over authorship practices — co-authors not accused

No legal proceedings

Leading anaesthesiology journals retracted numerous papers identified as fraudulent. Co-authors stated that their names had been added without their having access to the data or participating in the work in the usual way.

State of the evidence
Documented
Attribution
Directly implicated

Sources · 2

  1. [1]
    PubMedFraudulent pain research: a hurt so deep nothing can alleviate itAcademic publicationHigh reliability
  2. [2]
    NatureHospital investigation reveals long-running fraudPressVery high reliability

Last verified: 14 September 2026

Add to this entry

07

1996–2008

1996–2008: data fabricated in at least 21 publications over approximately thirteen years

Investigation

Baystate's internal investigation concluded that Reuben had fabricated some or all of the data in at least 21 papers, some dating back to 1996. Some concerned postoperative analgesia, COX-2 inhibitors and other medications.

Attribution
Directly implicated

Sources · 2

  1. [1]
    The BMJProminent celecoxib researcher admits fabricating data in 21 articlesPressVery high reliability
  2. [2]
    NatureHospital investigation reveals long-running fraudPressVery high reliability

Last verified: 14 September 2026

Add to this entry

II. Constellation of documented links

No documented link with another published profile for now.

Two profiles are linked when a documented controversy of one names the other. The link points to that controversy and its sources; it does not indicate a personal relationship.

III. Has something changed?

A new court decision, a missing source, a mistake? Tell us what should be updated: every request is read by the editorial team.

Support the archive

Controversia checks and updates its profiles independently. Support is optional and has no effect on the content of profiles.

Donate

Update request

Scott Reuben

Say which controversy is concerned and, if possible, give a source. Between 10 and 2,500 characters.

0 / 2500

To prevent abuse, the approximate location of your connection is recorded with your request.

iPhone and iPad

Install Controversia

  1. Tap Share
  2. then Add to Home Screen

Tap Share, then Add to Home Screen.