Update based on CRAN comments

Thanks, you have examples like

   retractcheck_docx('manuscript.docx')

that cannot run, since there is no 'manuscript.docx'.

Why don't you include small files in your inst/extdata as for your
retractcheck_pdf() example?
In this case you do not even need \donttest{} and we can check your code.

Please fix and resubmit.

R/retractcheck.R

@@ -97,7 +97,7 @@ retractcheck_dir <- function (path, ...) {
 #' @return \code{\link{retractcheck}} dataframe without filenames
 #' @export
 #' @examples \donttest{
-#'   retractcheck_docx('manuscript.docx')
+#'   retractcheck_docx(system.file("extdata", "manuscript.docx", package = "retractcheck"))
 #' }
 
 retractcheck_docx <- function (path, ...) {
@@ -139,7 +139,7 @@ retractcheck_pdf <- function (path, ...) {
 #' @return \code{\link{retractcheck}} dataframe without filenames
 #' @export
 #' @examples \donttest{
-#'   retractcheck_rtf('manuscript.rtf')
+#'   retractcheck_rtf(system.file("extdata", "manuscript.rtf", package = "retractcheck"))
 #' }
 
 retractcheck_rtf <- function (path, ...) {
@@ -160,7 +160,7 @@ retractcheck_rtf <- function (path, ...) {
 #' @return \code{\link{retractcheck}} dataframe without filenames
 #' @export
 #' @examples \donttest{
-#'   retractcheck_html('manuscript.html')
+#'   retractcheck_html(system.file("extdata", "manuscript.html", package = "retractcheck"))
 #' }
 
 retractcheck_html <- function (path, ...) {
@@ -181,7 +181,7 @@ retractcheck_html <- function (path, ...) {
 #' @return \code{\link{retractcheck}} dataframe without filenames
 #' @export
 #' @examples \donttest{
-#'   retractcheck_txt('manuscript.txt')
+#'   retractcheck_txt(system.file("extdata", "manuscript.txt", package = "retractcheck"))
 #' }
 
 retractcheck_txt <- function (path, ...) {

inst/extdata/manuscript.html

@@ -0,0 +1,25 @@
+<ol start="14" style="list-style-type: decimal">
+<li></li>
+<li></li>
+<li></li>
+<li></li>
+<li></li>
+<li></li>
+<li></li>
+<li></li>
+<li></li>
+<li></li>
+<li></li>
+<li></li>
+<li></li>
+<li></li>
+<li></li>
+<li></li>
+<li></li>
+<li></li>
+<li></li>
+<li></li>
+<li></li>
+<li></li>
+<li>Nuzzo R. Scientific method: statistical errors. Nature News. 2014; 506(7487):150. Halsey LG, Curran-Everett D, Vowler SL, Drummond GB. The fickle P value generates irreproducible results. Nat Methods. 2015; 12(3):179–85. Epub 2015/02/27. https://doi.org/10.1038/nmeth.3288 PMID: 25719825. Senn S, Goodman SN. A comment on replication, p-values and evidence. Author’s reply. Statistics in medicine. 2002; 21(16):2437–47. Wasserstein RL, Lazar NA. The ASA’s statement on p-values: context, process, and purpose. Taylor &amp; Francis; 2016. Cumming G. Replication and p Intervals: p Values Predict the Future Only Vaguely, but Confidence Intervals Do Much Better. Perspect Psychol Sci. 2008; 3(4):286–300. Epub 2008/07/01. https://doi.org/ 10.1111/j.1745-6924.2008.00079.x PMID: 26158948. Cumming G. Intro statistics 9: dance of the P values 2013. Available from: https://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=5OL1RqHrZQ8. Miller J, Schwarz W. Aggregate and individual replication probability within an explicit model of the research process. Psychological methods. 2011; 16(3):337. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0023347 PMID: 21534683 Dirnagl U. Rethinking research reproducibility. The EMBO Journal. 2018:e101117. https://doi.org/10. 15252/embj.2018101117 PMID: 30518534 Nosek BA, Errington TM. Reproducibility in cancer biology: making sense of replications. Elife. 2017; 6: e23383. https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.23383 PMID: 28100398 Aarts AA, Anderson JE, Anderson CJ, Attridge PR, Attwood A, Axt J, et al. Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science. Science. 2015; 349(6251):253–67. Vasishth S, Mertzen D, Jäger LA. The statistical significance filter leads to overoptimistic expectations of replicability. 2018. Klein R, Ratliff K, Nosek B, Vianello M, Pilati R, Devos T, et al. Investigating variation in replicability: The “many labs” replication project. Retrieved from Open Science Framework. 2014. Goodman SN, Berlin JA. The use of predicted confidence intervals when planning experiments and the misuse of power when interpreting results. Annals of internal medicine. 1994; 121(3):200–6. PMID: 8017747 Albers C, Lakens D. When power analyses based on pilot data are biased: Inaccurate effect size esti- mators and follow-up bias. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. 2018; 74:187–95. Lakens D. How many participants should you collect? An alternative to the N * 2.5 rule 2015 [cited 2017]. Available from: http://daniellakens.blogspot.de/2015/04/how-many-participants-should-you.html Simonsohn U. Small telescopes: detectability and the evaluation of replication results. Psychol Sci. 2015; 26(5):559–69. Epub 2015/03/25. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797614567341 PMID: 25800521. Neumann K, Grittner U, Piper SK, Rex A, Florez-Vargas O, Karystianis G, et al. Increasing efficiency of preclinical research by group sequential designs. PLoS Biol. 2017; 15(3):e2001307. https://doi.org/10. 1371/journal.pbio.2001307 PMID: 28282371; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC5345756. Lakens D. Performing high-powered studies efficiently with sequential analyses. European Journal of Social Psychology. 2014; 44(7):701–10. Lakens D, Evers ER. Sailing from the seas of chaos into the corridor of stability: Practical recommenda- tions to increase the informational value of studies. Perspectives on Psychological Science. 2014; 9 (3):278–92. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691614528520 PMID: 26173264 Goodman SN, Fanelli D, Ioannidis JP. What does research reproducibility mean? Science translational medicine. 2016; 8(341):341ps12–ps12. https://doi.org/10.1126/scitranslmed.aaf5027 PMID: 27252173 Blainey P, Krzywinski M, Altman N. Replication: quality is often more important than quantity. Nature Methods. 2014; 11(9):879–81. PMID: 25317452 Llovera G, Hofmann K, Roth S, Salas-Pérdomo A, Ferrer-Ferrer M, Perego C, et al. Results of a preclin- ical randomized controlled multicenter trial (pRCT): Anti-CD49d treatment for acute brain ischemia. Sci- ence Translational Medicine. 2015; 7(299):299ra121–299ra121. https://doi.org/10.1126/scitranslmed. aaa9853 PMID: 26246166 Ioannidis JPA. The Reproducibility Wars: Successful, Unsuccessful, Uninterpretable, Exact, Concep- tual, Triangulated, Contested Replication. Clin Chem. 2017; 63(5):943–5. Epub 2017/03/17. https://doi. org/10.1373/clinchem.2017.271965 PMID: 28298413.</li>
+</ol>