Substantial intellectual contribution to the design and drafting of a paper constitutes the minimum requirement for co-authorship.
the verdict
INSUFFICIENT LEANING
refutedsupported
the weight of evidence
5 sources for · 0 against
Standard editorial guidelines such as those from the ICMJE establish that a substantial contribution to conception and design is a key component of authorship, but it must be accompanied by drafting or revising the manuscript and final approval to satisfy full criteria.
Dear Editor, Recognition as an author is an honor and credit for most researchers. In recent years, the number of authors has been increased along with the increase in the number of research articles (1). For instance, the mean number of authors per paper was 4.5 in 1980 and 6.9 in 2002 in biomedical journals (2). We know that, publication of a scientific work is the final stage of a long time careful planning, execution, analyses and scientific writing. So it is important to have articles without any scientific misconduct problems. Today, scientific misconduct is a crucial issue in the field of medical research. One of the most challenging issues in the field of scientific misconduct is disobeyed authorship criteria. According to ICMJE (International Committee of Medical Journal Editors) criteria, authorship credit should be based on the following three criteria: 1) Substantial contribution to the conception and design, data acquisition, or analysis and interpretation of data; 2) Drafting or revising the manuscript, critically for important intellectual content 3) Final approval of the version to be published (3). A researcher should meet all criteria to be named as an author. Two terms should be considered according to this criteria, guest and ghost authors. Guest author is someone who is named as an author but without adequate contribution and ghost author is someone who had enough contribution while her/his name was not mentioned as an author (4, 5). Although many biomedi
The Journal of Korean Medical Science (JKMS) follows the recommendations for authorship by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE, 2008, www.icmje.org) and the Good Publication Practice Guidelines by the Korean Association of Medical Journal Editors (KAMJE, 2008, www.kamje.or.kr). The Uniform Requirements by the ICMJE recommends authorship as follows. "Authorship credit should be based on 1) substantial contributions to conception and design, acquisition of data, or analysis and interpretation of data; 2) drafting the article or revising it critically for important intellectual content; and 3) final approval of the version to be published. Authors should meet conditions 1, 2, and 3." Beyond the ICMJE recommendations, the KAMJE guidelines suggest that all authors should make a substantial intellectual contribution to the publication, the guidelines warn against authorship abuse, and list common types of abuse. Authorship is an important aspect of research publication, and all involved authors should agree whole contents of the document including authorship. Contributors should be differentiated from authors as recommended by the ICMJE. JKMS does not allow multiple corresponding authors for one article even when it is reporting on a multicenter study. Only one author should correspond with the editorial office and readers for one article. JKMS accepts notice of equal contribution for the first author when the study was clearly performed by co-first author
In 1985, the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) created a standardised set of criteria for authorship.1 The central principle underlying these criteria is that authorship is an intellectual activity that entails contributions to ideas (eg, conceptualising a study and framing the research question), analyses (eg, formulating the analysis approach/framework and/or performing the actual analysis), writing (and revising the manuscript) and ownership (of the study or research project). The ICMJE criteria have been broadly adopted by biomedical and health journals, including those focused on global health research. They have also been revised over time to accommodate emerging issues and concerns: for example, recognising author roles such as data acquisition (2000 revision)2 and the need for all authors to be accountable for the work (2013 revision).3 The ICMJE recommends that authorship be based on meeting all the following four criteria4: 1. ‘Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work; AND 2. Drafting the work or revising it critically for important intellectual content; AND 3. Final approval of the version to be published; AND 4. Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved’. While these guidelines are widely accepted, comp
Objective: To quantify authors' contributions in manuscripts sent to the Croatian Medical Journal and their eligibility for authorship criteria defined by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) by 1) substantial contributions to conception and design, or acquisition of data, or analysis and interpretation of data ; 2) drafting the article or revising it critically for important intellectual content ; and 3) final approval of the version to be published. Design: All 532 authors who submitted 121 manuscripts to the Croatian Medical Journal from January 18 to May 23, 2005, were randomly allocated into two groups and asked to rate their contributions from 0 (none) to 4 (full). A total of 240 were assigned to the rating-questionnaire group (57 manuscripts) and 292 were assigned to the yes/no-questionnaire group (64 manuscripts) for 11 contribution categories. They were not instructed on ICMJE authorship criteria. Results: The number of manuscripts with authors not fulfilling ICMJE criteria was significantly higher in yes/no-questionnaire grup than in the rating-questionnaire group (82.8% vs 28.1% ; χ ² ; ; 1=36.87, P< .001). The number of undeserved authors was significantly higher in yes/no-questionnaire grup than in the rating-questionnaire group (64.7% vs 13.8% ; χ ² ; ; 1=140.77, P< .001). The rating-questionnaire group also reported more contribution categories. Conclusions: The lower prevalence of undeserved authorship in the rating-questionnaire grou
This research is presented in a manuscript-based format, meaning that it has been divided into three separate, yet connected, manuscripts. Following a global introduction section and literature review, the three manuscripts are included as separate chapters, followed by a global conclusion chapter that completes the dissertation. Authorship and Publication Status of Manuscripts Standard authorship criteria (from the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors) were used to establish authorship on the three manuscripts included in my dissertation. According to these criteria, "Authorship credit should be based on 1) substantial contribution to conception and design, acquisition of data, or analysis and interpretation of data; 2) drafting the article or revising it critically for important intellectual content; and 3) final approval of the version to be published. Authors should meet conditions 1, 2, and 3" (http://www.icmje.org/ethical_lauthor.html). As there are co-authors on each of the manuscripts, I have outlined below the contributions of myself and all co-authors for each manuscript included in this dissertation. As the student, I took the lead role in all manuscripts. Specifically, I led the design and execution of the study, collected and conducted the analysis of the data, and led the writing, under the guidance of my supervisor and with contributions from supervisory committee members. Efforts have been made to publish this research and details of submissions
Everything we examined (5)
This check searched the claim as stated. It did not run a separate search for evidence against it.