scholarly journals ¿Quién es autor? Las autorías múltiples, criterios y lineamientos

2021 ◽  
Vol 44 (2) ◽  
pp. e290
Author(s):  
Alberto Chamorro

Este artículo tiene por objeto: 1. Poner en evidencia las prácticas injustificadas más recurrentes en la asignación de autorías en las publicaciones científicas. 2. Rastrear los criterios frecuentemente aceptados dentro de la comunidad académica para establecer quién puede, en propiedad, llamarse autor, y 3. Proponer un conjunto de medidas que permitan valorar apropiadamente artículos con múltiples autores. Para ello se hizo una revisión de artículos publicados en Pubmed y Scopus usando palabras claves como “autoría” (authorship), “criterios para establecer autorías” (authorship guidelines), “artículos con múltiples autores” (multiple authors). A partir de los hallazgos, se indagaron las irregularidades más relevantes y los principios más aceptados. Como resultado, a través de los documentos consultados fueron identificadas las prácticas más censurables y las fuentes de criterios más reconocidas para establecer las autorías: International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), Council Science Editors (CSE), The World Association of Medical Editors (WAME), National Institutes of Health (NIH), The American Psychological Association (APA) y The Center for Values, Ethics and the Law in Medicine, Sidney University (SEH). Debido a que gran parte de los lineamientos dados por estas organizaciones son en su mayor parte impracticables, se propone una nueva forma y se concluye que es menester que tanto financiadores, instituciones, editoriales, editores en jefe e investigadores, asuman ciertas funciones de control y seguimiento, de tal forma que se preserve la integridad científica de las publicaciones, sin interferencia de las métricas.

Publications ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 37 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sameer Kumar

Increasing specialization, changes in the institutional incentives for publication, and a host of other reasons have brought about a marked trend towards co-authored articles among researchers. These changes have impacted Science and Technology (S&T) policies worldwide. Co-authorship is often considered to be a reliable proxy for assessing research collaborations at micro, meso, and macro levels. Although co-authorship in a scholarly publication brings numerous benefits to the participating authors, it has also given rise to issues of publication integrity, such as ghost authorships and honorary authorships. The code of conduct of bodies such as the American Psychological Association (APA) and the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) make it clear that only those who have significantly contributed to the study should be on the authorship list. Those who have contributed little have to be appropriately “acknowledged” in footnotes or in the acknowledgement section. However, these principles are sometimes transgressed, and a complete solution still remains elusive.


2009 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 387-395 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jordi Piqué Angordans ◽  
Ramón Camaño Puig ◽  
Carmen Piqué Noguera

This research focuses on the analysis of how nursing journals publish their papers. Basically, two models are analyzed, Vancouver, by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors, and APA by the American Psychological Association. Their advantages and disadvantages are discussed. In view of how research papers are currently published and how research is judged, the authors propose that nursing journals adopt their own model, irrespective of how medical professionals publish.


2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 62-68 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christine Laine ◽  
Margaret A Winker

The World Association of Medical Journal Editors (WAME) Board has recently announced the publication of the WAME statement on Identifying Predatory or Pseudo-Journals (posted on February 18, 2017). Members of WAME are permitted to republish the statement in their journals. As Editor-in-Chief and Editor of Journal of Enam Medical College are members of WAME, we are republishing this important paper in Journal of Enam Medical College.J Enam Med Col 2017; 7(2): 62-68


2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Margaret A. Winker ◽  
Lorraine E. Ferris ◽  
And the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME)

No abstract available. Editor’s note: The World Association of Medical Editors (WAME) is a voluntary global organization of medical journal editors, who are uniquely positioned to define the critical role that editors have to play in promoting global health. In its 20 years of existence, WAME has sought to facilitate worldwide cooperation and communication among editors of peer-reviewed medical journals, improve editorial standards, and promote professionalism in medical journal editing. Medical journal editors have a social responsibility to promote global health by publishing, whenever possible, research that furthers health worldwide. What follows is a formal statement of the rational underlying and guiding that responsibility.


2016 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 2 ◽  
Author(s):  
Darren B Taichman ◽  
Joyce Backus ◽  
Christopher Baethge ◽  
Howard Bauchner ◽  
Peter W De Leeuw ◽  
...  

2013 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 119
Author(s):  
International Committee Of Medical Journal Editors

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.


2015 ◽  
Vol 61 (1) ◽  
pp. 67-68
Author(s):  
Alfredo Oyola-García

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