Authorship
an ethical dilemma of science
Keywords:
Authorship, Ethics, Science, Scientific misconduct, PublicationsAbstract
CONTEXT AND OBJECTIVE: The scientific and technological progress that has taken place since the 1960s has brought an ever-growing volume of scientific research, and inflation in co-authorship. Over this period, it has been observed that an increasing number of publica- tions have listed authors or co-authors whose participation in the published research was minimal or even nonexistent. The objective of this work was to analyze reports in the literature regarding misconduct in authorship: its types, chief causes, consequences and ethical guidelines; and to outline proposals for greater ethical commitment in scientific publication. DESIGN AND SETTING: Narrative review un- dertaken at Faculdade de Medicina de Itajubá, Minas Gerais, Brazil. METHODS: Analysis of publications about au- thorship using the Medline, Lilacs and SciELO databases. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: Frequent types of misconduct were gift authorship and divided and redundant publications. The chief causes of these practices seem to be the pressure exerted by academia and the desire for social and professional development. Such factors have brought an increase in unethical behavior. This bias in science continues despite the criteria defined by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors, the Vancouver group. RECOMMENDATIONS: Various actions are proposed for educational institutions, research development agencies, regulatory agencies and professional associations. The aim is to establish an evaluation policy that gives primacy to the quality of publications and sets ethical principles for scientific research.
Downloads
References
Montenegro MR. Autoria e co-autoria: justificativa e desvio. [Authorship and co-authorship: excuse and deviation]. J Pneu- mol. 1999;25(3):159-62.
Kempers RD. Ethical issues in biomedical publications. Fertil Steril. 2002;77(5):883-8.
Bennett DM, Taylor DM. Unethical practices in authorship of scientific papers. Emerg Med (Fremantle). 2003;15(3):263-70.
Sahu DR, Abraham P. Authorship: rules, rights, responsibilities and recommendations. J Postgrad Med. 2000;46(3):205-10.
Weeks WB, Wallace AE, Kimberly BC. Changes in authorship patterns in prestigious US medical journals. Soc Sci Med. 2004;59(9):1949-54.
Fye WB. Medical authorship: traditions, trends and tribulations. Ann Intern Med. 1990;113(4):317-25.
Silva Júnior OC, Augusto C. Co-autoria: acaso ou necessi- dade? [Coauthorship: chance or necessity?]. Acta Cir Bras. 1989;4(3):89-91.
Burman KD. “Hanging from the masthead”: reflections on authorship. Ann Intern Med. 1982;97(4):602-5.
Leash E. Is it time for a new approach to authorship? Available from URL: http://www.councilscienceeditors.org/services/leash_article.cfm. Accessed in 2005 (Aug 10).
Lawrence PA. The politics of publication. Nature.2003;422(6929):259-61.
Lock S. Lessons from the Pearce affair: handling scientific fraud. BMJ. 1995;310(6994):1547-8.
Faintuch J. Apropósitodaco-autorianos trabalhos científicos. [Apropos of co-authorship in cientific papers]. Acta Cir Bras. 1991;6(1):3-4.
Jacard M, Herskovic V, Hernández I, Reyes H. Un análisis de la autoría en los artículos publicados en la Revista Médica de Chile. [An analysis of authorship in articles published in Revista Médica de Chile]. Rev Méd Chile. 2002;130(12):1391-8.a scientific work]. Rev Assoc Med Bras. 2002;48(1):60-5.
Relman AS. Publish or perish-or both. N Engl J Med. 1977;297(13):724-5.
Slone RM. Coauthors’ contributions to major papers published in the AJR: frequency of undeserved coauthorship. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1996;167(3):571-9.
Petroianu A. Autoria de um trabalho científico. [Authorship of scientific papers. Emerg Med (Fremantle). 2003;15(3):263-70.
Coimbra Jr CEA. O desafio da autoria. Cad Saúde Pública. 1998;14(4):668-9.
International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. Req- uisitos uniformes para manuscritos apresentados a periódicos biomédicos. [Uniform requirements for manuscripts submitted to biomedical journals] Rev Saúde Pública. 1999;33(1)6-15.
Committee on Publication Ethics. Guidelines and Code of Conduct. Guidelines on good publication practice. Available from URL: http://www.publicationethics.org.uk/guidelines. Accessed in 2005 (Aug 10).
World Association of Medical Editors. WAME recommenda- tions on publication ethics policies for medical journals. Avail- able from URL: http://www.wame.org/pubethicrecom.htm. Accessed in 2005 (Aug 10).
Shulkin DJ, Goin JE, Rennie D. Patterns of authorship among chairmen of departments of medicine. Acad Med. 1993;68(9):688-92.
Goodman NW. Survey of fulfillment of criteria for authorship in published medical research. BMJ. 1994;309(6967):1482.
Bhopal R, Rankin J, McColl E, et al. The vexed question of authorship: views of researchers in a British medical faculty. BMJ. 1997;314(7086):1009-12.
Eysenbach G. Medical students see that academic misconduct is common. BMJ. 2001;322(7297):1307.
Rennie D, Yank V, Emanuel L. When authorship fails. A proposal to make contributors accountable. JAMA. 1997;278(7):579-85.
International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. Uniforms re- quirements for manuscripts submitted to biomedical journals: writing and editing for biomedical. Updated November 2003. Available from URL: http://www.icmje.org/icmje.pdf. Accessed in 2005 (Aug 10).
Ruiz JA. Metodologia científica. guia para eficiência nos estudos. 4a ed. São Paulo: Atlas; 1996.
Gaeta TJ. Authorship: “Law” and order. Acad Emerg Med. 1999;6(4):297-301.
Huth EJ. Irresponsible authorship and wasteful publication. Ann Intern Med. 1986;104(2):257-9.
Nylenna M. Medisinskpublisering- kunnskapsformidlingellerpersonlig promovering? [Medical publishing - dissemination of knowledge or personal promotion?] Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen. 1996;116(30):3652-5.
Goldenberg S. Publicação do trabalho científico: compromisso ético. Versão preliminar. Available from URL: http://www.me- todologia.org/saul_etica.PDF. . Accessed in 2005 (Aug 10).
Gilbert FJ, Denison AR. Research misconduct. Clin Radiol. 2003;58(7):499-504.
Smith J. Gift authorship: a poisoned chalice? BMJ. 1994;309(6967):1456-7.
Horton R, Smith R. Time to redefine authorship. BMJ. 1996;312(7033):723.
Huth EJ. Guidelines on authorship of medical papers. Ann Intern Med. 1986;104(2):269-74.
Freud S. O mal estar na civilização. In: Freud S, editor. Obras psicológicas completas. Rio de Janeiro: Imago; 1974. p. 81.
Ministério da Educação e do Desporto. Secretaria de Educação Superior – SESu. Coordenação das Comissões de Especialistas de Ensino - COESP. Comissão de Especialistas do Ensino Médico - CEEM. Padrões mínimos de qualidade para cursos de graduação em medicina. Available from URL: http://www.mec.gov.br/Sesu/ftp/medicina.doc. Accessed in 2005 (Aug 05).
Flanagin A, Carey LA, Fontanarosa PB, et al. Prevalence of arti- cles with honorary authors and ghost authors in peer-reviewed medical journals. JAMA. 1998;280(3):222-4.
Bordage G, Caelleigh AS, Steinecke A, et al. Review criteria for research manuscripts. Acad Med. 2001;76(9):897-978.
Kennedy D. Next steps in the Schon affair. Science. 2002;298(5593):495.
Bates T, Anic A, Marusic M, Marusic A. Authorship criteria and disclosure of contributions: comparison of 3 general medi- cal journals with different author contribution forms. JAMA. 2004;292(1):86-8.
Council of Science Editors. Authorship task force. Available from URL: http://www.councilscienceeditors.org/services/authorship. cfm. Accessed in 2005 (Jun 21).
EASE - European Association of Science Editors. History of EASE. Avail- able from URL: http://www.ease.org.uk. Accessed in 2005 (Aug 10).
Associação Brasileira de Editores Científicos. ABEC. Ata da Assembléia de Fundação da Associação Brasileira de Editores Científicos. Available from URL: http://www.liber.ufpe. br/abec/arquivos/Estatuto.pdf.. Accessed in 2005 (Jun 21).
Conselho Federal de Medicina. Dispõe sobre o Código de Ética Médica. Resolução CFM no 1.246, de 8 de janeiro de 1988. Brasília: Diário Oficial da União; Poder Executivo, de 26 janeiro 1988. Seção 1, p. 1574-7. Available from URL: http://www.cremesp.org.br/siteAcao=PesquisaLegislacao&dif=s&ficha=1&id=2940&tipo=RESOLU%C7%C3O&orgao=Conselho%20Federal%20de%20Medicina&numero=1246&situacao=VIGENTE&data=08-01-1988#anc_integra. Accessed in 2005 (Jun 22).
Conselho Federal de Enfermagem. Resolução COFEN 160. Aprova o Código de Ética do Profissionais de Enfermagem. Available from URL: http://www.coren-rj.org.br/codigo_etica.htm. Accessed in 2005 (Aug 10).
Conselho Federal de Farmácia. Aviso de Retificação de 6 de maio de 2005. Resolução no 417 de 29 de setembro de 2004. Aprova o Código de Éticada Profissão Farmacêutica. Available from URL: http://www.cff.org.br/Legisla%C3%A7%C3%A3o/Resolu%C3%A7%C3%B5es/res_417_2004.htm Accessed in 2005 (Aug 10).
Conselho Federal de Odontologia. Código de ética odontológica. Resolução no 42, de 20 de maio de 2003. Available from URL: www. cfo.org.br/download/pdf/codigo_etica.pdf. Accessed in 2005 (Aug 10).
