ArticleAccountability in research2021
Is authorship sufficient for today's collaborative research? A call for contributor roles.
Article in Accountability in research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 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
21 citing papers in PubMed.
- Dragon Kill Points: applying a transparent working template to relieve authorship stress.BMC biology · 2026Review
- Disclosing generative AI use for writing assistance should be voluntary.Research ethics · 2025Article
- From Solo to Collaborative: The Global Increase in Neuroscience Authors Over Two Decades.The European journal of neuroscience · 2025Article
- Working in biocuration: contemporary experiences and perspectives.Database : the journal of biological databases and curation · 2025Article
- Inclusive Research in Medical Education: Strategies to Improve Scholarship and Cultivate Scholars.Journal of general internal medicine · 2025Article
- A systematic scoping review of the ethics of Contributor Role Ontologies and Taxonomies.Accountability in research · 2024Article
- Sequestration of steroidal estrogen in aqueous samples using an adsorption mechanism: a systemic scientometric review.RSC advances · 2023Review
- How to build up big team science: a practical guide for large-scale collaborations.Royal Society open science · 2023Article
- Evolution and adoption of contributor role ontologies and taxonomies.Learned publishing : journal of the Association of Learned and Professional Society Publishers · 2023Article
- Review
- Dataset of identified scholars mentioned in acknowledgement statements.Scientific data · 2022Article
- Authorship Issues When Articles are Retracted Due to Research Misconduct and Then Resubmitted.Science and engineering ethics · 2022Article
- An Ethical Exploration of Increased Average Number of Authors Per Publication.Science and engineering ethics · 2022Article
- Credit and Recognition for Contributions to Data-Sharing Platforms Among Cohort Holders and Platform Developers in Europe: Interview Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2022Article
- Engaging the open science framework in quantifying and tracing scientists' research credits.Frontiers in integrative neuroscience · 2022Article
- Article
- An Open-Publishing Response to the COVID-19 Infodemic.CEUR workshop proceedings · 2021Article
- Publication Ethics.Indian pediatrics · 2021Article
- CRediT for authors of articles published in theJournal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA · 2021Article
- From Reductionism to Reintegration: Solving society's most pressing problems requires building bridges between data types across the life sciences.PLoS biology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Assigning authorship and recognizing contributions to scholarly works is challenging on many levels. Here we discuss ethical, social, and technical challenges to the concept of authorship that may impede the recognition of contributions to a scholarly work. Recent work in the field of authorship shows that shifting to a more inclusive contributorship approach may address these challenges. Recent efforts to enable better recognition of contributions to scholarship include the development of the Contributor Role Ontology (CRO), which extends the CRediT taxonomy and can be used in information systems for structuring contributions. We also introduce the Contributor Attribution Model (CAM), which provides a simple data model that relates the contributor to research objects via the role that they played, as well as the provenance of the information. Finally, requirements for the adoption of a contributorship-based approach are discussed.
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.