Ivan Oransky presented on lessons learned from Retraction Watch over the past decade. Some key points included that common reasons for retractions are duplication, plagiarism, image manipulation and fake data. Studies have found that only 44% of papers with identified issues received a decision from journals within a year, and decisions were slow, opaque and inconsistent. Estimates suggest that only a fraction of papers with problems are caught and retracted. Journals are also often slow to notify readers when papers are retracted. Overall, the system of identifying and correcting the scientific record relies on whistleblowers, though responsibility is unclear.