"As part of our follow up we are seeking further expert advice on the analyses reported in the article" Plos One
In a win for advocates pressing for a retraction of several studies associated with the PACE trial,
Retraction Watch recently reported that one of them, PLOS One has begun its own internal investigation.
They stated that the editors of PLOS One have flagged the article with an "editor's note" . The note states that they are aware of the controversy, that they expect the authors of the study make their data available, and that they have begun their own investigation into it.
If you click on the article you can see that Editor's is plastered over the front of the page - there's no missing it.
This is the first official action by a publication that I know of to address the controversy swirling around the study. If the PLOS ONE article falls then it's hard to imagine that Lancet - one of the most esteemed medical journals in the world - would not be obliged to examine the original study.
Given the huge cost of that study, and the numerous publications that have come and are still coming out of the it, a retraction of the original Lancet study would have enormous implications for the researchers involved, and perhaps even for the CBT/GET field.