scholarly journals Honorary Authorship: Is There Any Chance to Stop It? Analysis of the Literature and a Personal Opinion

Tomography ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (4) ◽  
pp. 801-803
Author(s):  
Emilio Quaia ◽  
Filippo Crimi’
Keyword(s):  
Medical Journal ◽  
International Committee ◽  
Journal Editors ◽  
Personal Opinion ◽  
Honorary Authorship

Honorary authorship corresponds to the intentional misrepresentation of credit to an individual whose contributions to a biomedical article do not meet the criteria for authorship established by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) [...]

Authorship

2016 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Medical Journal ◽  
Data Analysis ◽  
Data Collection ◽  
International Committee ◽  
Rapid Review ◽  
Design Data ◽  
Journal Editors ◽  
Collection Data ◽  
Honorary Authorship ◽  
Definition Of

This chapter begins with a definition of authorship and provides the The Proposed Rapid Review Checklist for Authors (the 5Ds: design, data collection, data analysis, discussion of findings, the ability to define the paper and its message) which may be useful in judging whether authorship should be considered. The authorship model proposed by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) is also outlined. The chapter also discusses different forms of inappropriate authorship models (ghost authorship, guest/honorary authorship, anonymous authorship) and presents intellectual property and copyright considerations. An author's responsibility to report an original, accurate, focused and repeatable account of the research conducted is also discussed.

scholarly journals Authorship in Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery

2021 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 330-335
Author(s):  
Pravesh S. Gadjradj ◽  
Mamta Jalimsing ◽  
Sandhia Jalimsing ◽  
Istifari Voigt
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Medical Journal ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Maxillofacial Surgery ◽  
International Committee ◽  
High Impact ◽  
Oral And Maxillofacial Surgery ◽  
Journal Editors ◽  
Honorary Authorship ◽  
Question Survey

Abstract Background and Objective According to the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), authorship should be offered based on fulfilling four criteria. Honorary authorship (HA) is a term used for authors enlisted who did not fulfill these criteria. The objective of this study was to determine the proportion of HA in the field of oral and maxillofacial surgery. Material and Methods In 2020, a twenty-two question survey was sent to corresponding authors of four high-impact journals in the field of oral and maxillofacial surgery. The survey covered (1) demographics, (2) awareness of authorship guidelines and decision-making of authorship, and (3) honorary authorship. Results The response rate was 24.8%. Of the respondents, 81.1% was aware of the issue of guidelines on authorship, while 56.3% was aware of the issue of HA. Yet, 15.5% of the respondents felt that one or more of their co-authors did not deserve authorship based on the ICMJE-guidelines. Conclusion Based on the estimated proportions of HA, attempts should be made by universities, medical journals and individual researchers to further reduce authorship misuse.

Frequency and Factors Associated With Honorary Authorship in Indian Biomedical Journals: Analysis of Papers Published From 2012 to 2013

2018 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 187-195 ◽  
Author(s):  
Akash Shah ◽  
Sathish Rajasekaran ◽  
Anup Bhat ◽  
John M. Solomon
Keyword(s):  
Medical Journal ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
International Committee ◽  
General Issue ◽  
Factors Associated ◽  
Journal Editors ◽  
Biomedical Journals ◽  
Honorary Authorship

Honorary authorship is the inclusion of an author on an article whose contribution does not warrant authorship. We conducted an Internet-based survey among first authors publishing in Indian biomedical journals from 2012 to 2013 to study the frequency and factors associated with honorary authorship. The response rate was 27% (245/908) with the prevalence of perceived, International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE)-defined, and unperceived honorary authorship of 20.9% (50/239), 60% (147/245), and 46.9% (115/245), respectively. Those residing in India were found to list more honorary authors. We hope to increase awareness of the ICMJE authorship guidelines and the general issue of honorary authorship among researchers in India and elsewhere.

scholarly journals Honorary authorship in Geriatric Literature: do authors adhere to the ICMJE-guidelines?

2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Alex Verhemel ◽  
Yalda Dahi ◽  
Selay Kakar ◽  
Pravesh S. Gadjradj
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Medical Journal ◽  
Odds Ratio ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
International Committee ◽  
Factors Associated ◽  
Senior Member ◽  
Journal Editors ◽  
Survey Response Rate ◽  
Honorary Authorship

To protect appropriate authorship, the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) formulated a guideline on authorship. Researchers not fulfilling these criteria and still enlisted as author are seen as honorary authors (HA). The objective of this study is to assess authorship decision making and the proportion of HA in journals in the field of geriatrics and gerontology. Corresponding authors of six highimpact journals in geriatrics and gerontology were sent a survey. The survey consisted of three parts: i) demographics of the respondent; ii) awareness of authorship guidelines; and iii) authorship decisions made for the paper they are authors of. Respondents were also asked if one of their coauthors does not deserve authorship. This is defined as self-perceived HA. Furthermore, respondents were asked if any of their co-authors only performed tasks from a list of non-authorship tasks. This is defined as ICMJE-defined HA. Of the 1592 contacted authors, 528 filled in a survey (response rate 33.2%). 84.4% was aware of the ICMJE-guidelines, but 44.2% was unaware of the issue of HA. The proportion of self-perceived HA was 12.7%. Independent factors associated with more self-perceived HA were having a senior member automatically enlisted as coauthor [odds ratio (OR) 3.4, 95%confidence interval (CI) 1.8 to 6.4] and have gotten the suggestion to include an HA (OR 11.1, 95% CI 4.4 to 27.9). The proportion of ICMJE defined HA was 39.3%. The journal surveyed (OR 1.2, 1.0 to 1.3) was associated with more, and awareness of the ICMJE-guidelines (OR 0.5, 95% CI 0.3 to 0.9) was associated with less ICMJE-defined HA respectively. Having a senior member automatically enlisted as co-author (OR 2.1 95% CI 1.3 to 3.4) and having anyone suggest to include an HA (OR 4.8 95% CI 1.8 to 12.8) were also associated with more ICMJE-defined HA. More than one out of ten of the corresponding authors thinks that based on the ICMJE-guidelines, one or more of their coauthors did not deserve authorship. A stricter journal policy and more awareness of the ICMJE-guidelines could help reduce the proportion of HA.

scholarly journals Editorial-Sharing Clinical Trial Data: A Proposal from the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors

2016 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 2 ◽  
Author(s):  
Darren B Taichman ◽  
Joyce Backus ◽  
Christopher Baethge ◽  
Howard Bauchner ◽  
Peter W De Leeuw ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Medical Journal ◽  
Clinical Trial Data ◽  
International Committee ◽  
Trial Data ◽  
Journal Editors

scholarly journals Declaraciones del Comité Internacional de Directores de Revistas Médicas anexas a las normas de Vancouver

2013 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 119
Author(s):  
International Committee Of Medical Journal Editors
Keyword(s):  
Medical Journal ◽  
International Committee ◽  
Popular Media ◽  
Conflicts Of Interests ◽  
Research Papers ◽  
Journal Editors ◽  
Biomedical Journals ◽  
Dissemination Of Research ◽  
Definition Of

These statements, which are published by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors in conjunction with the Vancouver standards, cover sorne of the legal, ethical, and practical aspects of the publication of research papers, and of the comments generated by them, in biomedical journals. Pollowing a definition of what constitutes a peer-reviewed journal, the roles of journal owners and editors are described, along with those of members of an editorial board, and procedural norms are set forth in connection with conflicts of interests, retractions or corrections, fraud, and breaches of confidentiality. Arnong the last topics explored are the problems involved in the dissemination of research results by the popular media, the handling of advertising within the journal, and the simultaneous acceptance of manuscripts whose authors have arrived at opposite conclusions regarding the results of a particular study.

scholarly journals ¿Qué hacer cuando un lector sospecha de una falta ética?

2015 ◽  
Vol 61 (1) ◽  
pp. 67-68
Author(s):  
Alfredo Oyola-García
Keyword(s):  
Medical Journal ◽  
International Committee ◽  
Journal Editors

La mayoría, o casi todas, las publicaciones científicas siguen las recomendaciones del International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). Este comité señala claramente que la publicación duplicada es una mala conducta científica(1,2), pero también lo puede ser la difamación pública, como lo hemos señalado en otros artículos.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document