Honorary And Ghost Authors in 20pct of Medical Journal Articles Affecting Research Accountability

Just over one in five (21%) of articles published in six leading medical journals in 2008 have evidence of honorary and ghost authorship, finds a study

Just over one in five (21%) of articles published in six leading medical journals in 2008 have evidence of honorary and ghost authorship, finds a study published on http://www.bmj.com today.

These results demonstrate that inappropriate authorship remains a problem in high impact biomedical publications, say the authors.

Clinical Trials - Early History
Many of the drugs that are used today have been discovered by chance or often by mere serendipity

Inappropriate (honorary and ghost) authorship and the resulting lack of transparency and accountability have been important concerns for the academic community for decades. Honorary authors are individuals who are named as authors but have not contributed substantially to be able to take responsibility for the work. Ghost authors are individuals who have made substantial contributions to the work but are not named as authors.

In the 1980s, the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) developed guidelines for responsible and accountable authorship. These criteria are updated regularly and have been adopted by more than 600 biomedical journals. However, studies have found the prevalence of honorary authors to be as high as 39%, and ghost authors as high as 11% across a range of journals.

So a team of US researchers compared the prevalence of articles with honorary and ghost authors published in six leading general medical journals in 2008 with that reported by authors of articles published in 1996.

Medical Research and the Elimination of Bias
Most people are rather vague when reporting on food and drink consumption, smoking and exercise habits.

A total of 630 authors responded to the survey. The overall prevalence of articles with honorary authorship, ghost authorship, or both was 21%, a decline from 29% in 1996.

They found no change in the prevalence of honorary authors relative to 1996, but found a significant decline in the prevalence of ghost authorship.

New Approaches to Biomedical Research Advocated
Two deans from the UC Davis School of Medicine have outlined several approaches to biomedical research workforce development, a topic that is currently under

The highest prevalence of both types of inappropriate authorship occurred in original research articles, as opposed to editorials and review articles.

These results demonstrate that inappropriate authorship remains a problem in high-impact biomedical publications, say the authors.

Global Health Groups Urge USA to Accelerate Medical Research and Approvals
A coalition of 30 leading global health organizations that work on vaccines, drugs, and other tools and technologies that save lives today released a

They conclude that "increased efforts by scientific journals, individual authors, and academic institutions are essential to promote responsibility, accountability, and transparency in authorship, and to maintain integrity in scientific publication."

These results suggest that standards need tightening up, say Patricia Baskin and Robert Gross from the journal Neurology, in an accompanying editorial.

They point out that "as research becomes more collaborative and complex, the challenges to transparency in authorship and disclosure become greater," and they call for further work "to assess whether greater definition of roles and conflicts of interest substantially change the prevalence of inappropriate authorship."

Source-Eurekalert