Appearance of ghost and gift authors in Ugeskrift for Læger and Danish Medical Journal.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Authorship should establish accountability and transparency, but previous research into authorship has demonstrated that authors do not always meet the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors' (ICMJE) authorship criteria. Yet, these studies have mainly focused on international, high-impact journals. The aim of the present study was to assess Danish authors' general authorship experiences and views on authorship and authorship criteria. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Corresponding authors of articles published in Ugeskrift for Læger and Danish Medical Journal in 2010 received a web-based questionnaire about the sampled article, co-authors and contributors, general authorship experiences and views on authorship and authorship criteria. RESULTS: A total of 470 authors received the questionnaire and 292 responded (response rate 62%). 29% had experienced that "somebody" (the respondent himself/herself or an acquaintance/colleague) had been excluded from the author byline. 17% had been offered illegitimate authorship. 16% of the respondents had offered illegitimate authorship to somebody else. 25% of the respondents did not agree that legitimate authorship requires fulfilment of all three current ICMJE authorship criteria. Some contributions/functions not part of the current ICMJE criteria were also considered relevant for authorship, e.g. co-author supervision, statistical assistance and research group leadership. CONCLUSION: Illegitimate authorship is prevalent also in low-impact, national journals. In order to promote legitimate authorship, mandatory contribution statements should be considered, but education and information about existing criteria for authorship may be even more important. FUNDING: not relevant. TRIAL REGISTRATION: not relevant.