This study investigates the impact of gender diversity on the retraction of scientific publications. Analyzing a random sample of one million publications, covering 2,645,304 authors, alongside retraction data from Retraction Watch (39,709 publications), we identify key factors influencing publication retractions. Our findings indicate that mixed-gender teams are more likely to face retractions than all-male or all-female teams, while individual authors are less prone to retractions. Larger research teams have a lower risk of retraction, whereas medium-sized teams (3–10 authors) experience increased risk. A close look at the reasons associated with retractions reveals some notable differences: Male-led publications are often retracted for serious ethical violations, such as data falsification and plagiarism, while female-led publications primarily face procedural errors and updates in rapidly evolving fields. Promoting women to positions of responsibility in mixed collaborations may advance not only gender equity but also the accuracy of the scientific record.

Research funding is essential to expand knowledge, foster innovation, and address the complex challenges that shape our future. The scientific literature has extensively addressed the relationship between research funding and academic impact. More recently, several studies have analyzed the technological impact of funded research as measured through citations in patents, known as nonpatent references (NPRs). But there remains much to know about NPRs and the multiplication of case studies is necessary to characterize them. Here we analyze a sample of 7,065 publications funded by the French Foundation for Medical Research (FRM) and the citations of these publications in patents. This study shows the high scientific and technological impacts of FRM funding. Indeed, the publications funded by FRM that are cited in patents are 3.5 times more frequently cited by other publications than the global average (for funded publications in the entire database, this ratio is 2.6). Furthermore, our results also indicate that USPTO patents citing these publications exhibit high-quality indicators. Moreover, five of these patents have led to approved drug products by the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA). This study provides further evidence of the positive influence that research funding can have on both scientific and technological advancements.