Prevalence of articles with honorary authors and ghost authors in peer-reviewed medical journals
Prevalence of articles with honorary authors and ghost authors in peer-reviewed medical journals
复制标题
DOI：
10.1001/jama.280.3.222
复制
发表时间：
1998-07-15
影响因子：
120.7
通讯作者：
Rennie, D
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Flanagin, A;Carey, LA;Rennie, D
上下文。-生物医学出版物的作者身份建立了问责制、责任和信誉。盗用作者身份破坏了作者身份制度的完整性，但关于其普遍程度的准确数据是有限的。确定同行评议医学期刊中名誉作者（未达到作者标准的署名作者）和代写作者（未被命名为作者但对工作有重大贡献的个人）文章的流行程度，并确定与此类作者盗用相关的期刊特征和文章类型。-邮寄，自我管理，保密的调查。-对1996年发表在3个同行评议的大发行量普通医学期刊（《内科医学年鉴》、《美国医学会杂志》和《新英格兰医学杂志》）和3个同行评议的发行增刊的小发行量期刊（《美国心脏病学杂志》、《美国医学杂志》和《美国妇产科杂志》）上的文章的809名通讯作者（调查1179人，回复率69%）进行了调查。主要结果测量。-通讯作者报告的名誉作者和代作者文章的流行程度。在809篇文章中，492篇是原创研究报告，240篇是综述和未报告原始数据的文章，77篇是社论。共有156篇文章（19%）有荣誉作者的证据（范围，11%-25%的期刊）；93篇文章（11%）有证据表明有幽灵作者（范围，在期刊中为7%-16%），13篇文章（2%）两者都有证据。评论文章中有荣誉作者的文章比研究文章多（优势比[OR]， 1.8； 95%可信区间[CI]， 1.2-2.6），但发行量大的期刊和发行量小的期刊之间没有显著差异（优势比[OR]， 1.4； 95%可信区间[CI]， 0.96-2.03）。与大发行量期刊上的同类文章相比，小发行量期刊上的代写文章更有可能是综述（OR, 4.2; 95% CI, 1.5-13.5），而研究文章的可能性更小（OR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.27-0.88）。在同行评议的医学期刊上，相当一部分文章都有名誉作者或代笔作者的证据。
Context.-Authorship in biomedical publications establishes accountability, responsibility, and credit. Misappropriation of authorship undermines the integrity of the authorship system, but accurate data on its prevalence are limited.Objectives.-To determine the prevalence of articles with honorary authors (named authors who have not met authorship criteria) and ghost authors (individuals not named as authors but who contributed substantially to the work) in peer-reviewed medical journals and to identify journal characteristics and article types associated with such authorship misappropriation.Design.-Mailed, self-administered, confidential survey.Participants.-A total of 809 corresponding authors (1179 surveyed, 69% response rate) of articles published in 1996 in 3 peer-reviewed, large-circulation general medical journals (Annals of Internal Medicine, JAMA, and The New England Journal of Medicine) and 3 peer-reviewed, smaller-circulation journals that publish supplements (American Journal of Cardiology, American Journal of Medicine, and American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology).Main Outcome Measures.-Prevalence of articles with honorary authors and ghost authors, as reported by corresponding authors.Results.-Of the 809 articles, 492 were original research reports, 240 were reviews and articles not reporting original data, and 77 were editorials. A total of 156 articles (19%) had evidence of honorary authors (range, 11%-25% among journals); 93 articles (11%) had evidence of ghost authors (range, 7%-16% among journals) and 13 articles (2%) had evidence of both. The prevalence of articles with honorary authors was greater among review articles than research articles (odds ratio [OR], 1.8; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.2-2.6) but did not differ significantly between large-circulation and smaller-circulation journals (OR, 1.4; 95% CI, 0.96-2.03). Compared with similar-type articles in large-circulation journals, articles with ghost authors in smaller-circulation journals were more likely to be reviews (OR, 4.2; 95% CI, 1.5-13.5) and less likely to be research articles (OR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.27-0.88).Conclusion.-A substantial proportion of articles in peer-reviewed medical journals demonstrate evidence of honorary authors or ghost authors.