Has anything you cite been quietly corrected?

Paste your bibliography. This tells you which of your references carry a published correction, erratum, expression of concern, withdrawal or retraction — not just the retractions everyone checks for.

Paste a reference list, a BibTeX file, or one DOI per line. Anything works — the DOIs get picked out of the mess. Vancouver-style entries that cite by PMID work too: those are looked up in PubMed first. Nothing else in your text is read.

What this is, and what it is not

Retractions are the famous case and free tools already cover them. But a retraction is the rarest kind of change to the scientific record. Corrections and errata are several times more common, and nobody emails you when the figure you built an argument on was corrected two years after you read it — the paper is still perfectly valid, which is exactly why nobody looks.

A change notice is not a verdict on the science. Most corrections are a typo, a wrong unit, a mislabelled axis. This tells you something changed; reading what changed is your job.

It asks two registers, because one is not enough. Crossref only holds what a publisher deposited, so a correction nobody registered is invisible there. PubMed keeps the same information separately, compiled by NLM indexers rather than by the publisher, and the gap between them is not small. Sampling 400 records per category on 11 September 2026: of the papers PubMed says carry a notice, Crossref’s data would let you find 78.8% of the corrections, 91.8% of the expressions of concern and 93.7% of the retractions. One corrected paper in five would have come back clean here if this page asked Crossref alone. Anything found only in PubMed is labelled per PubMed so you can see which register spoke.

That number measures Crossref against PubMed, not against the truth — PubMed will have its own holes, and this page does not know their size. It also only covers biomedicine, because PubMed only covers biomedicine. Two registers beat one; two registers are still not all of them. Anything without a DOI stays invisible to both, so preprints, books and chapters often come back “not found” — and this page says so instead of pretending they came back clean.

PMIDs have a hole in them, and it is measured. A PubMed id is translated to a DOI before anything can be checked, and not every record has one. Sampling 1,558 random PubMed records on 9 September 2026: 72.5% listed a DOI — 95.7% of the recent ones, but only 48.6% of those from before 1990. If you cite older biomedical literature, expect some references to come back not checked. They are listed by name rather than quietly dropped, because a reference nobody checked reads exactly like a clean one.

Your bibliography is not uploaded anywhere

There is no server behind this page. Your text stays in your browser; only the identifiers found in it leave it — and since 11 September 2026 they leave it twice, because both registers get asked: every DOI and PMID goes to Crossref’s public API and to NCBI’s public E-utilities. It used to be that only your PMIDs reached NCBI; that is no longer true, and saying so plainly matters more than the sentence looking tidy. Both are public services with their own privacy policies; nothing goes through me. No account, no cookies, no analytics, nothing logged by me. You can save this page and run it offline from your own disk — it is one HTML file with no dependencies.