Medical publication: An insight into the future

Papadakis, Marios; Zirngibl, Hubert

doi:10.1016/j.injury.2020.04.009

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As stated by Papadakis and Zirngibl, “Authorship abuse is not a victimless crime. If scientists or clinicians are prepared to lie about the people involved with a research project or a publication, why should we expect them to be any more honest about their findings?” 27 Authorship practices and misbehavior influence not just manuscript and research group integrity but more broadly the culture of institutional research integrity, and there is an association between authorship conflicts and other research misbehaviors. 28…”

Section: Authorship: What Counts Who Counts Who Cares?mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…If scientists or clinicians are prepared to lie about the people involved with a research project or a publication, why should we expect them to be any more honest about their findings?" 27 Authorship practices and misbehavior influence not just manuscript and research group integrity but more broadly the culture of institutional research integrity, and there is an association between authorship conflicts and other research misbehaviors. 28 How authorship is determined and how credit is apportioned today are "highly subjective, open to abuse, and often determined more by laboratory politics or seniority than by actual effort or contribution."…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Authorship and Publication Matters: Credit and Credibility

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A nesthesiology periodically updates our Instructions to Authors and communicates the changes broadly. This Editorial aims to provide brief summaries, background information, justifications, and applicability of the Journal policy updates, which are effective with this issue. These updates address the importance of recognizing the role of collaborators in research and mechanisms in Anesthesiology for doing so, qualifications for authorship in Anesthesiology, unacceptable types of authorship, salami publication versus appropriate use of segmented publication, acceptability of limited text recycling, and other elements of scientific integrity. Authorship: What Counts, Who Counts, Who Cares?Appropriate recognition for contributions to basic, clinical, and population research is an important aspect of scholarly publication. Anesthesiology strongly endorses the practice of appropriately crediting contributions to research publications toward the goals of giving proper recognition, fairness, and transparency for authors and readers, ensuring contemporary Journal best practices, and clarity of communication. Anesthesiology has for years provided multiple ways to offer appropriate credit on articles and communicate that credit through commensurate means of attribution and will continue to do so.What constitutes authorship is one of the most vexing problems in contemporary scholarly publishing, in part because there are no universal definitional standards of authorship. The sine qua non of authorship is a substantial intellectual contribution. Authorship denotes credit. Equally important is that authorship also denotes responsibility and accountability. Authorship credit and accountability are inseparable. Authorship is one form of credit, but other forms are more appropriate for work done that does not include all the necessary elements of authorship.Scholarly publications serve a dual purpose-one for which they were created and the other an unintended byproduct. The former is scientific communication, and the latter is use by institutions for assessment and reward. 1 Authorship is used in science to communicate research findings to peers and the public, denote credit and responsibility, document personal accomplishment, and advance careers, while it is used outside science by institutions whose interests often differ, such as for promotion and tenure processes, metrics of faculty productivity, and ranking institutional programs and reputations. 2,3 In both embodiments, communication and academia, authorship is "the currency of the political economy of scientific practice." 4 That primary currency of scientific credit ("coin of the realm") is reward assigned through peer Image: None (Journal icon).

show abstract

Section: Authorship: What Counts Who Counts Who Cares?mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%