ArticlePloS one2019
Intellectual contributions meriting authorship: Survey results from the top cited authors across all science categories.
Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 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
22 citing papers in PubMed.
- Understanding of Authorship Guidelines and the Frequency of Authorship Misuse: A Descriptive Cross-Sectional Study in the State of Qatar.Journal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE · 2026Article
- Dragon Kill Points: applying a transparent working template to relieve authorship stress.BMC biology · 2026Review
- A policy toolkit for authorship and dissemination policies may benefit NIH research consortia.Accountability in research · 2024Article
- The undeclared use of third-party service providers in academic publishing is unethical: an epistemic reflection and scoping review.Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology · 2024Article
- Authorship and Citizen Science: Seven Heuristic Rules.Science and engineering ethics · 2024Article
- "The person in power told me to"-European PhD students' perspectives on guest authorship and good authorship practice.PloS one · 2023Article
- Transparency in conducting and reporting research: A survey of authors, reviewers, and editors across scholarly disciplines.PloS one · 2023Article
- Cancer research across Africa: a comparative bibliometric analysis.BMJ global health · 2022Article
- Authorship Issues When Articles are Retracted Due to Research Misconduct and Then Resubmitted.Science and engineering ethics · 2022Article
- Honorary authorship in health sciences: a protocol for a systematic review of survey research.Systematic reviews · 2022Article
- Exploring Knowledge and Perceptions of Faculty Members about Authorship: A Study from Jordan.European online journal of natural and social sciences · 2022Article
- Using scientific authorship criteria as a tool for equitable inclusion in global health research.BMJ global health · 2021Article
- Student Perceptions of Authoring a Publication Stemming from a Course-Based Undergraduate Research Experience (CURE).CBE life sciences education · 2021Article
- Data sharing practices and data availability upon request differ across scientific disciplines.Scientific data · 2021Article
- Authorship Weightage Algorithm for Academic Publications: A New Calculation and ACES Webserver for Determining Expertise.Methods and protocols · 2021Article
- ICMJE criteria for authorship: why the criticisms are not justified?Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2021Article
- No room for ambiguity: The concepts of appropriate and inappropriate authorship in scientific publications.Indian journal of ophthalmology · 2021Article
- Researchers' Perceptions of Ethical Authorship Distribution in Collaborative Research Teams.Science and engineering ethics · 2020Article
- Taiwanese Researchers' Perceptions of Questionable Authorship Practices: An Exploratory Study.Science and engineering ethics · 2020Article
- Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Authorship is the currency of an academic career for which the number of papers researchers publish demonstrates creativity, productivity, and impact. To discourage coercive authorship practices and inflated publication records, journals require authors to affirm and detail their intellectual contributions but this strategy has been unsuccessful as authorship lists continue to grow. Here, we surveyed close to 6000 of the top cited authors in all science categories with a list of 25 research activities that we adapted from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) authorship guidelines. Responses varied widely from individuals in the same discipline, same level of experience, and same geographic region. Most researchers agreed with the NIH criteria and grant authorship to individuals who draft the manuscript, analyze and interpret data, and propose ideas. However, thousands of the researchers also value supervision and contributing comments to the manuscript, whereas the NIH recommends discounting these activities when attributing authorship. People value the minutiae of research beyond writing and data reduction: researchers in the humanities value it less than those in pure and applied sciences; individuals from Far East Asia and Middle East and Northern Africa value these activities more than anglophones and northern Europeans. While developing national and international collaborations, researchers must recognize differences in peoples values while assigning authorship.
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.