Journal retracts vaping-stroke study after data flaws raised; paper had fuelled anti-vape messaging
January 22, 2026
Photo: iStock
Open access publisher MDPI has retracted a controversial paper that claimed e-cigarette users face a higher risk of early stroke than traditional cigarette smokers, following concerns about major errors in the analysis and an investigation that failed to resolve the issues.
The study, published in Neurology International in 2022, had already gained traction: it was cited 22 times (per Clarivate’s Web of Science), received media coverage and was used in public-facing anti-vaping campaigns, according to Retraction Watch.
In a retraction notice dated 18 December 2025, the journal said complaints were raised after publication regarding “several major errors in the data analysis”, undermining the validity of the findings.
The journal’s editorial office and board “have lost confidence in the reliability of the findings” as the authors were unable to provide satisfactory explanations or supporting materials during an investigation, leading to the retraction.
MDPI added that attempts to contact the “relevant institution” for further information were unsuccessful and that the authors did not agree to the retraction.
“Seems like a joke”
The paper had previously been scrutinised in a 2024 Science investigation into businesses that offer rapid publication opportunities, particularly aimed at international medical graduates seeking US residency placements, Retraction Watch reported.
The bog quoted Harvard biostatistician and epidemiologist Miguel Hernán as saying the paper “seems like a joke”, and arguing that no “self-respecting journal” should have published it.
According to Retraction Watch, the corresponding author Urvish Patel is linked to a Texas-based organisation called Research Update Organization, described as one of the operations offering publication pathways to participants. It also reported that some coauthors were international medical graduates who paid to join the programme, and that the paper did not disclose this, while allegedly misrepresenting Patel’s affiliation with Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai in New York.
Patel, contacted by Retraction Watch, disputed the process and criticised the time taken to conclude the work was flawed.
The study first drew the attention of Gal Cohen and Floe Foxon, both of whom work in contract research and have ties to vaping firm Juul Labs.
The pair later submitted concerns to the journal, highlighting issues including an alleged sample size error, insufficient stroke observations and lack of clarity over whether strokes happened before or after vaping began.
Foxon told Retraction Watch the retraction was reassuring, but raised a wider question: how the article was published in the first place, given errors that should have been visible to anyone familiar with the dataset and methods.
MDPI did not respond to a request for comment, Retraction Watch said.
