Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31532464›Full record

ArticleJAMA surgery2019

Courtesy Authorship in Academic Surgery Publications.

John M McClellan, Neel Mansukhani, Donald Moe, Michael Derickson, Stephen Chiu, Melina R Kibbe, Matthew J Martin

Abstract readVideo-Audio Media
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA surgery, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Unjustified Authorship Should Not Be Tolerated.Journal of Korean medical science · 2019
    Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

John M McClellanTrauma and Emergency Surgery Service, Legacy Emanuel Medical Center, Portland, Oregon.
Neel MansukhaniDivision of Vascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois.
Donald MoeDepartment of Surgery, Madigan Army Medical Center, Tacoma, Washington.
Michael DericksonDepartment of Surgery, Madigan Army Medical Center, Tacoma, Washington.
Stephen ChiuDivision of Vascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois.
Melina R KibbeDivision of Vascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois.
Matthew J MartinTrauma and Emergency Surgery Service, Legacy Emanuel Medical Center, Portland, Oregon.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Courtesy authorship is defined as including an individual who has not met authorship criteria as an author. Although most journals follow strict authorship criteria, the current incidence of courtesy authorship is unknown. Objective: To assess the practices related to courtesy authorship in surgical journals and academia. Design, Setting, and Participants: A survey was conducted from July 15 to October 27, 2017, of the first authors and senior authors of original articles, reviews, and clinical trials published between 2014 and 2015 in 8 surgical journals categorized as having a high or low impact factor. Main Outcomes and Measures: The prevalence of courtesy authorship overall and among subgroups of authors in high impact factor journals and low impact factor journals and among first authors and senior authors, as well as author opinions regarding courtesy authorship. Results: A total of 203 first authors and 254 senior authors responded (of 369 respondents who provided data on sex, 271 were men and 98 were women), with most being in academic programs (first authors, 116 of 168 [69.0%]; senior authors, 173 of 202 [85.6%]). A total of 17.2% of respondents (42 of 244) reported adding courtesy authors for the surveyed publications: 20.4% by first authors (32 of 157) and 11.5% by senior authors (10 of 87), but 53.7% (131 of 244) reported adding courtesy authorship on prior publications and 33.2% (81 of 244) had been added as a courtesy author in the past. Although 45 of 85 senior authors (52.9%) thought that courtesy authorship has decreased, 93 of 144 first authors (64.6%) thought that courtesy authorship has not changed or had increased (P = .03). There was no difference in the incidence of courtesy authorship for low vs high impact factor journals. Both first authors (29 of 149 [19.5%]) and senior authors (19 of 85 [22.4%]) reported pressures to add courtesy authorship, but external pressure was greater for low impact factor journals than for high impact factor journals (77 of 166 [46.4%] vs 60 of 167 [35.9%]; P = .04). More authors in low impact factor journals than in high impact factor journals thought that courtesy authorship was less harmful to academia (55 of 114 [48.2%] vs 34 of 117 [29.1%]). Overall, senior authors reported more positive outcomes with courtesy authorship (eg, improved morale and avoided author conflicts) than did first authors. Conclusions and Relevance: Courtesy authorship use is common by both first and senior authors in low impact factor journals and high impact factor journals. There are different perceptions, practices, and pressures to include courtesy authorship for first and senior authors. Understanding these issues will lead to better education to eliminate this practice.

Indexed as

Periodicals as TopicPublishingSurgical Procedures, OperativeAuthorshipHumans

Identifiers

PMID31532464
PMCPMC6752091

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.