We illustrate the important and troubling issue of persistent misinformation and false claims in the medical literature using a frequently cited case inaccurately believed by many to be the first case of calciphylaxis.
We identified a recurring error in the medical literature in the form of numerous citations of a study from the 1890s of a 6-month-old child with idiopathic infantile arterial calcification that is purported to be the first description of a case of calciphylaxis. We performed searches to determine the frequency of this error. Google Scholar and PubMed were searched for references citing the Bryant and White article. Accuracy of the citations was determined.
A Google Scholar search identified 33 references that incorrectly cite the Bryant and White article as the first description of a case of calciphylaxis. Of the 100 most recent PubMed publications on calciphylaxis, we identified five studies that incorrectly attribute the Bryant and White article as the first description of calciphylaxis, which accounts for approximately 5% of the contemporary literature on this topic.
Medical misinformation such as this is frequently perpetuated. We propose that computational resources could be better used to flag erroneous and contradicted claims to update and correct the literature.