Recognition, reward and responsibility: why the authorship of scientific papers matters.

Author lists should inform readers about who did a piece of research. If authorship attribution is incorrect, the wrong people may take the credit or the blame. Correct authorship of medical papers is also important because the research and publication process relies on trust. If scientists or clinicians are prepared to lie about who was involved with a research project why should we believe their findings? Groups of journal editors, notably the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors, have tried to establish criteria for authorship but these are not universally accepted. Despite the lack of agreement, authorship of journal articles continues to be the basis for academic appointments and is used to measure the research output of departments and therefore determine future funding. Some journals have started to use contributor lists, indicating the role of each individual, in place of, or in addition to, traditional lists of authors. However, problems about the threshold of involvement that merits authorship, and the order of listing remain unresolved. Journal editors are usually unable to adjudicate on authorship disputes since detailed, local knowledge is required. Institutions might therefore play a greater role in setting and enforcing authorship policies. Disputes could be reduced if authorship criteria were agreed, in writing, among all contributors at the start of a research project.

[1]  Matko Marušić,et al.  How the structure of contribution disclosure statements affects validity of authorship: a randomized study in a general medical journal* , 2006, Current medical research and opinion.

[2]  D. Kronick Peer review in 18th-century scientific journalism. , 1990, JAMA.

[3]  K. Arimura,et al.  Discoidin domain receptor 1 contributes to eosinophil survival in an NF-kappaB-dependent manner in Churg-Strauss syndrome. , 2007, Blood.

[4]  O. Dyer Consultant struck off for fraudulent claims , 1995, BMJ.

[5]  R Smith,et al.  Authorship: time for a paradigm shift? , 1997, BMJ.

[6]  Elizabeth Wager,et al.  Good publication practice for pharmaceutical companies , 2003, Current medical research and opinion.

[7]  Elizabeth Wager,et al.  Do medical journals provide clear and consistent guidelines on authorship? , 2007, MedGenMed : Medscape general medicine.

[8]  Roderick Hunt,et al.  Trying an authorship index , 1991, Nature.

[9]  R Bhopal,et al.  The vexed question of authorship: views of researchers in a British medical faculty , 1997, BMJ.

[10]  Navjeevan Singh,et al.  Awareness of authorship criteria and conflict: survey in a medical institution in India. , 2006, MedGenMed : Medscape general medicine.

[11]  Elizabeth Wager,et al.  How to handle authorship disputes: a guide for new researchers , 2009, Science Editor and Publisher.

[12]  D. Rennie,et al.  When authorship fails. A proposal to make contributors accountable. , 1997, JAMA.

[13]  A. Sheikh,et al.  Publication ethics and the research assessment exercise: reflections on the troubled question of authorship , 2000, Journal of medical ethics.

[14]  Matko Marusić,et al.  Authorship criteria and disclosure of contributions: comparison of 3 general medical journals with different author contribution forms. , 2004, JAMA.

[15]  H Maisonneuve,et al.  Authorship ignorance: views of researchers in French clinical settings , 2005, Journal of Medical Ethics.