Advertisement

World Journal of Surgery

, Volume 43, Issue 3, pp 696–703 | Cite as

Honorary Authorships in Surgical Literature

  • J. D. LuitenEmail author
  • A. Verhemel
  • Y. Dahi
  • E. J. T. Luiten
  • P. S. Gadjradj
Original Scientific Report (including Papers Presented at Surgical Conferences)

Abstract

Introduction

Honorary authorship (HA) is defined as an enlisted co-author who did not make sufficient contributions to merit being included as a co-author according to the ICMJE guidelines on authorship. It is unknown if HA is present in the surgical literature.

Methods

We analysed studies published in 2016 in five journals with the highest impact factor in general surgery. All original articles, reviews and clinical trials with more than one author were included. Corresponding authors of these manuscripts received an online survey by email. The survey consisted of three parts focussing on demographics, knowledge and application of the ICMJE guidelines, and deciding authorship.

Results

In total, 320 of the 1037 surveys were completed (30.9%). Two hundred and seventy-two (88.6%) of the corresponding authors were aware of the ICMJE authorship guidelines, and 203 (66.3%) were aware of the general issue of honorary authorship. One hundred and thirty-five (44.0%) responders reported at least one co-author who only performed tasks which should not merit actual authorship according to the ICMJE guidelines. Furthermore, only 46 (15.0%) of the responders believed that a co-author listed for their article did not make sufficient contribution to merit being included as co-author. No significant differences were found between the journals investigated.

Conclusion

Despite ICMJE guidelines to reduce HA, the prevalence may still exist to a higher level than preferable. The authors plead for more transparent authorship systems in which journal editors and senior department members take more responsibility into enforcement of the ICMJE guidelines.

Notes

Author’s contribution

JL, AV, YD and PG contributed to acquisition of data; JL, EL and PG analysed and interpreted the data; JL and PG drafted the article; JL designed the tables; AV and YD designed the figures; all authors critically revised the article; JL, EL and PG approved the final version on behalf of all authors.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Supplementary material

268_2018_4831_MOESM1_ESM.docx (117 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 117 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    Defining the Role of Authors and Contributors: International Committee of Medical Journal Editors; 2017. http://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/roles-and-responsibilities/defining-the-role-of-authors-and-contributors.html
  2. 2.
    The Ethics of Manuscript Authorship: Best Practices for Attribution: American Journal Experts. https://www.aje.com/en/arc/ethics-manuscript-authorship/
  3. 3.
    Strange K (2008) Authorship: Why not just toss a coin? Am J Physiol Cell Physiol 295(3):C567–C575CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gadjradj PS, Fezzazi RE, Meppelder CA, Rietdijk WJ, Matabadal NN, Verhemel A et al (2018) Letter: honorary authorship in neurosurgical literature: a cross-sectional analysis. Neurosurgery 82(1):E25–E28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Eisenberg RL, Ngo LH, Bankier AA (2014) Honorary authorship in radiologic research articles: Do geographic factors influence the frequency? Radiology 271(2):472–478CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kayapa B, Jhingoer S, Nijsten T, Gadjradj PS (2018) The prevalence of honorary authorship in the dermatological literature. Br J Dermatol 178(6):1464–1465CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Flanagin A, Carey LA, Fontanarosa PB, Phillips SG, Pace BP, Lundberg GD et al (1998) Prevalence of articles with honorary authors and ghost authors in peer-reviewed medical journals. JAMA 280(3):222–224CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Wislar JS, Flanagin A, Fontanarosa PB, Deangelis CD (2011) Honorary and ghost authorship in high impact biomedical journals: a cross sectional survey. BMJ 343:3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Shapiro DW, Wenger NS, Shapiro MF (1994) The contributions of authors to multiauthored biomedical research papers. JAMA 271(6):438–442CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Elliott KC, Settles IH, Montgomery GM, Brassel ST, Cheruvelil KS, Soranno PA (2017) Honorary authorship practices in environmental science teams: structural and cultural factors and solutions. Acc Res 24(2):80–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Johnson TP, Wislar JS (2012) Response rates and nonresponse errors in surveys. JAMA 307(17):1805–1806CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Nulty DD (2008) The adequacy of response rates to online and paper surveys: What can be done? Assess Eval High Educ 33(3):4CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Société Internationale de Chirurgie 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of SurgeryElisabeth-Tweesteden HospitalTilburgThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Department of NeurosurgeryErasmus MC, University Medical CentreRotterdamThe Netherlands
  3. 3.Department of SurgeryAmphia HospitalBredaThe Netherlands
  4. 4.Department of NeurosurgeryLeiden University Medical CentreLeidenThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations