ArticleResearch in nursing & health2018
Authorship grids: Practical tools to facilitate collaboration and ethical publication.
Article in Research in nursing & health, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- A policy toolkit for authorship and dissemination policies may benefit NIH research consortia.Accountability in research · 2024Article
- Reducing tensions and expediting manuscript submission via an authorship agreement for early-career researchers: A pilot study.Accountability in research · 2023Article
- Writing for "International Orthopaedics": authorship, fraud, and ethical concerns.International orthopaedics · 2021Article
- Article
- Integrity of Authorship and Peer Review Practices: Challenges and Opportunities for Improvement.Journal of Korean medical science · 2018Review
- Perceptions of Academic Authorship in Medicine: A Multi-Specialty Survey of Physicians.Journal of medical education and curricular developmentArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Publication of new findings and approaches in peer-reviewed journals is fundamental to advancing science. As interprofessional, team-based scientific publication becomes more common, authors need tools to guide collaboration and ethical authorship. We present three forms of authorship grids that are based on national and international author recommendations, including guidelines from the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors, the Committee on Publication Ethics, National Institutes of Health data sharing policies, common reporting guidelines, and Good Clinical Practice standards from the International Conference on Harmonization. The author grids are tailored to quantitative research, qualitative research, and literature synthesis. These customizable grids can be used while planning and executing projects to define each author's role, responsibilities, and contributions as well as to guide conversations among authors and help avoid misconduct and disputes. The grids also can be submitted to journal editors and published to provide public attribution of author contributions.
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.