Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40811760›Full record

ArticlePLoS computational biology2025

Ten simple rules for being a co-author on a many-author non-empirical paper.

Friederike E Kohrs, Natascha Drude, Anita Bandrowski, Tracey L Weissgerber

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS computational biology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

4 authors.

Friederike E KohrsBerlin Institute of Health at Charité-Universitätsmedizin, QUEST Center for Responsible Research, Berlin, Germany.ORCID 0009-0004-5696-9459
Natascha DrudeBerlin Institute of Health at Charité-Universitätsmedizin, QUEST Center for Responsible Research, Berlin, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-7153-2894
Anita BandrowskiBerlin Institute of Health at Charité-Universitätsmedizin, QUEST Center for Responsible Research, Berlin, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-5497-0243
Tracey L WeissgerberBerlin Institute of Health at Charité-Universitätsmedizin, QUEST Center for Responsible Research, Berlin, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-7490-2600

Funding

EU’s Horizon EuropeWellcome Trust 218358
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Many-author non-empirical papers include "how to" articles, recommendations or consensus statements, roadmaps for future research, catalogs of ideas, or calls to action. These papers benefit the research community and broader academic ecosystem by addressing unmet needs or introducing new perspectives and approaches. Large, diverse authorship teams that examine an issue from many different perspectives can create valuable resources that individual co-authors could not develop independently, or in smaller groups. Realizing the potential of many-author non-empirical papers, however, requires very different strategies than researchers would typically use to write papers with fewer authors. In our process, a core team of lead writers typically works together to lead the content generation and writing processes, while many co-authors collaboratively create content and provide feedback on outlines and drafts. Challenges for co-authors may include learning to write a different type of paper, adapting to high-volume feedback, and understanding the very diverse perspectives shared by fellow co-authors. This paper outlines ten simple rules for being a co-author on a many-author non-empirical paper. Although the rules were developed for papers with at least 30 authors, some rules may be useful for many-author research papers or for non-empirical papers with fewer authors. Co-authors may also want to consult our companion paper on ten simple rules for leading a many-author non-empirical paper, as understanding the challenges faced by lead writers will help co-authors to contribute more efficiently and effectively.

Indexed as

AuthorshipPublishingCooperative BehaviorHumansWriting

Identifiers

PMID40811760
PMCPMC12352870

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.