Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32567015›Full record

ArticleLife sciences, society and policy2020

Allonymous science: the politics of placing and shifting credit in public-private nutrition research.

Bart Penders, Peter Lutz, David M Shaw, David M R Townend

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Life sciences, society and policy, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 93% of its field
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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 5 countries.

Bart PendersDepartment of Health, Ethics & Society, Care and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Maastricht University, PO Box 616, Maastricht, NL-6200 MD, the Netherlands. b.penders@maastrichtuniversity.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2661-9181
Peter LutzDepartment of Health, Ethics & Society, Care and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Maastricht University, PO Box 616, Maastricht, NL-6200 MD, the Netherlands.
David M ShawDepartment of Health, Ethics & Society, Care and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Maastricht University, PO Box 616, Maastricht, NL-6200 MD, the Netherlands.
David M R TownendDepartment of Health, Ethics & Society, Care and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Maastricht University, PO Box 616, Maastricht, NL-6200 MD, the Netherlands.
Maastricht University · NLUniversity of Basel · CH

Funding

ZonMw 445001005
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Ideally, guidelines reflect an accepted position with respect to matters of concern, ranging from clinical practices to researcher behaviour. Upon close reading, authorship guidelines reserve authorship attribution to individuals fully or almost fully embedded in particular studies, including design or execution as well as significant involvement in the writing process. These requirements prescribe an organisation of scientific work in which this embedding is specifically enabled. Drawing from interviews with nutrition scientists at universities and in the food industry, we demonstrate that the organisation of research labour can deviate significantly from such prescriptions. The organisation of labour, regardless of its content, then, has consequences for who qualifies as an author. The fact that fewer food industry employees qualify is actively used by the food industry to manage the credibility and ownership of their knowledge claims as allonymous science: the attribution of science assisted by authorship guidelines blind to all but one organisational frame.

Indexed as

Nutritional Physiological PhenomenaPoliticsAuthorshipFemaleFood IndustryGuidelines as TopicHumansMaleResearchResearch PersonnelUniversitiesAllonymous scienceAuthorship guidelinesGhost authorshipGhost collaboratorshipGovernanceRenaissanceResearch organisation

Identifiers

PMID32567015
PMCPMC7309978
OpenAlexW3036763466

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.