Honorary authorship in postgraduate medical training

Rajasekaran, Sathish; Lo, Alto S.; Aly, Abdel-Rahman; Ashworth, Nigel

doi:10.1136/postgradmedj-2015-133493

Cited by 12 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The survey protocol received ethical clearance from the institutional ethics committee of Kasturba Medical College and Kasturba Hospital, Manipal (IEC 198/2014). The content of the survey, based on ICMJE authorship guidelines and questions, was modified from previous studies (Eisenberg et al, 2014; Rajasekaran, Lo, Aly, & Ashworth, 2015; Rajasekaran et al, 2014). Our survey included additional questions about reason(s) for the inclusion of an honorary author, including the revised ICMJE criteria in one of our questions.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

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

Shah

Rajasekaran

Bhat

et al. 2018

Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

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

Shah

Rajasekaran

Bhat

et al. 2018

Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In other words, some cases of honorary authorship may not be perceived as authorship misuse because researchers simply are not informed about authorship requirements. For example, a survey of postgraduate medical trainees conducted by Rajasekaran et al [36] in Canada revealed that 38.1% of the respondents positively answered a generic question about inclusion of an honorary author (an individual who has not made substantial contributions as an author) in a previous poster/podium presentation or manuscript. On the other hand, a much higher percentage (57%) of the same respondents acknowledged the inclusion of honorary authors when they were explicitly asked if the co-authors satisfied all four ICMJE authorship criteria.…”

Section: Training and Other Means To Prevent Authorship Misusementioning

confidence: 99%

“…In addition to the training needs and explicit authorship policies to be required by the medical journals, the Canadian study [36] revealed that an overwhelming majority (92%) of the postgraduate medical trainees believed that a support system for the authorship disputes should be implemented at the institution. The need to establish a system that helps resolve authorship disputes was also emphasized by other studies [39].…”

Section: Training and Other Means To Prevent Authorship Misusementioning

confidence: 99%

Perish or Publish Dilemma: Challenges to Responsible Authorship

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Controversies related to the concept and practice of responsible authorship and its misuse have been among the most prominent issues discussed in the recent literature on research integrity. Therefore, this paper aims to address the factors that lead to two major types of unethical authorship, namely, honorary and ghost authorship. It also highlights negative consequences of authorship misuse and provides a critical analysis of different authorship guidelines, including a recent debate on the amendments of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) authorship definition. Empirical studies revealed that honorary authorship was the most prevalent deviation from the responsible authorship standards. Three different modalities of honorary authorship were distinguished: gift authorship, guest authorship, and coercive authorship. Prevalence of authorship misuse worldwide and in Europe was alarmingly high, covering approximately one third of all scientific publications. No significant differences were reported in authorship misuse between different health research disciplines. The studies conducted in North America highlighted the most effective means to cope with unethical authorship. These were training in publishing ethics, clear authorship policies developed by medical schools, and explicit compliance with the authorship criteria required by the medical journals. In conclusion, more empirical research is needed to raise awareness of the high prevalence of authorship misuse among scientists. Research integrity training courses, including publication ethics and authorship issues should be integrated into the curricula for students and young researchers in medical schools. Last but not least, further discussion on responsible authorship criteria and practice should be initiated.

show abstract

“…The authors suggested that variations among policies may create confusion and hinder good authorship practices. In fact, studies in different academic settings have revealed deficiencies in the knowledge of authorship criteria (e.g., in [16,17]), lack of agreement about them [18], and noncompliance for various reasons [19][20][21][22]. Furthermore, in collaborative studies, each person's relative contribution is difficult for the research team to determine and for others to understand [23].…”

Section: Authors Contributors and Acknowledgeesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Transparent Attribution of Contributions to Research: Aligning Guidelines to Real-Life Practices

Matarese¹,

Shashok²

2019

Publications

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research studies, especially in the sciences, may benefit from substantial non-author support without which they could not be completed or published. The term “contributorship” was coined in 1997 to recognize all contributions to a research study, but its implementation (mostly in biomedical reports) has been limited to the inclusion of an “Author Contributions” statement that omits other contributions. To standardize the reporting of contributions across disciplines, irrespective of whether a given contribution merits authorship or acknowledgment, the Contributor Roles Taxonomy (CRediT) was launched in 2014. Our assessment, however, shows that in practice, CRediT is a detailed authorship classification that risks denying appropriate credit for persons who contribute as non-authors. To illustrate the shortcomings in CRediT and suggest improvements, in this article we review key concepts of authorship and contributorship and examine the range of non-author contributions that may (or may not) be acknowledged. We then briefly describe different types of editorial support provided by (non-author) translators, authors’ editors and writers, and explain why it is not always acknowledged. Finally, we propose two new CRediT taxa and revisions to three existing taxa regarding both technical and editorial support, as a small but important step to make credit attribution more transparent, accurate and open.

show abstract

Honorary authorship in postgraduate medical training

Cited by 12 publications

References 22 publications

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

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

Perish or Publish Dilemma: Challenges to Responsible Authorship

Transparent Attribution of Contributions to Research: Aligning Guidelines to Real-Life Practices

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About