ArticleCMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne2007
Reliability of disclosure forms of authors' contributions.
Article in CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
26 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 94 citations in OpenAlex.
- Honorary authorship is highly prevalent in health sciences: systematic review and meta-analysis of surveys.Scientific reports · 2024Pooled it
- A systematic review of research on the meaning, ethics and practices of authorship across scholarly disciplines.PloS one · 2011Pooled it
- The use of extracorporeal blood purification therapies and sequential extracorporeal support in patients with septic shock (EROICASS): a study protocol for a national, non-interventional, observational multicenter, prospective study.Journal of anesthesia, analgesia and critical care · 2024Article
- Quantitative research assessment: using metrics against gamed metrics.Internal and emergency medicine · 2024Review
- Task specialization across research careers.eLife · 2020Article
- Comparison of the contributions of female and male authors to medical research in 2000 and 2015: a cross-sectional study.BMJ open · 2019Article
- Ten simple rules for international short-term research stays.PLoS computational biology · 2017Article
- Thinker, Soldier, Scribe: cross-sectional study of researchers' roles and author order in theBMJ open · 2017Observational
- Article
- Author contributions to ecological publications: What does it mean to be an author in modern ecological research?PloS one · 2017Article
- Ethics of using language editing services in an era of digital communication and heavily multi-authored papers.Science and engineering ethics · 2014Article
- Of credence and credibility: A year gone by.The Indian journal of radiology & imaging · 2014Article
- Faculty Member's Views, Attitude and Current Practice As Regards International Committee of Medical Journal Editors Criteria for Authorship.Iranian journal of public health · 2013Article
- Medical students' decisions about authorship in disputable situations: intervention study.Science and engineering ethics · 2013Article
- Why do you think you should be the author on this manuscript? Analysis of open-ended responses of authors in a general medical journal.BMC medical research methodology · 2012Article
- Do we know and apply the principles of academic authorship?Ethiopian journal of health sciences · 2012Article
- Criteria for authorship in bioethics.The American journal of bioethics : AJOB · 2011Article
- How industry uses the ICMJE guidelines to manipulate authorship--and how they should be revised.PLoS medicine · 2011Article
- Authorship policies of bioethics journals.Journal of medical ethics · 2011Article
- Good season ahead.Croatian medical journal · 2011Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe contribution disclosure forms used by medical journals to assess and confirm authorship are surveys of self-reported behaviour that follow the cognitive rules of psychometric instruments. We sought to analyze how autobiographical memory, defined as memory for events and issues related to oneself, affected the reliability of contribution forms for the judging of authorship of research articles.
methodsWe conducted a prospective study, which ultimately included 919 authors of 201 articles submitted to a general medical journal from July 2001 through December 2002. A authorship disclosure form with a checklist of 11 possible contribution choices for all authors was sent first to each article's corresponding author, who was asked to fill it out for all authors. A blank form was then sent to each author individually to disclose his or her own contribution to that article. The main outcome measure was test- retest differences between the corresponding authors' self-declarations, expressed in percent as the gross difference rate (GDR) for each article.
resultsMore than two-thirds of the corresponding authors (69.7%) differed in at least 1 contribution choice between the 2 disclosure statements made about their own contributions. The reliability of their answers was low to moderate (GDRs > 10%), especially for contributions on the provision of study materials or patients or final approval of the article (GDR 22.9%), guarantor of the study (GDR 20.9%) and drafting of the manuscript (GDR 20.4%). As a proxy for their coauthors' contributions, corresponding authors also differed from them in the perception of noncorresponding authors' contributions, disagreeing in 69.4% of cases. Of the 718 noncorresponding authors, 204 (28.4%) met all the criteria for authorship set out by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors according to the statement given by the corresponding author. When they described their own contributions, this prevalence increased to 40.5%.
interpretationPsychological factors such as autobiographical memory may confound contribution disclosures as an evaluation tool for authorship on scientific articles and affect responsible authorship and publication practices.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.