Responsible Peer Review and Authorship Clifton D. Fuller, MD, PhD — MD Anderson Cancer Center DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.31957791 This 58-slide presentation, delivered as part of the Responsible Conduct of Research curriculum at UT MD Anderson Cancer Center, addresses two foundational pillars of scientific integrity: authorship attribution and peer review. The overarching objective is to equip trainees and faculty with the conceptual frameworks, regulatory standards, and practical decision-making skills necessary to navigate authorship disputes, fulfill reviewer obligations, and uphold publication ethics.The authorship section opens by contrasting ORI and ICMJE definitions of who qualifies as an author. The ICMJE four-criterion standard — substantial contribution to conception or design; drafting or critically revising intellectual content; final approval of the published version; and accountability for all aspects of the work — is presented as the operative framework. The presentation emphasizes that all four criteria must be satisfied conjointly, and that individuals meeting only some criteria should be acknowledged rather than listed as authors. A digression introduces ORCID as a persistent researcher identifier facilitating attribution across disciplines and institutions. Group authorship conventions, as used by the MD Anderson Head and Neck Cancer Symptom Working Group in several of Fuller's own publications, are illustrated with real examples from Oral Oncology Reports an