TY - JOUR
T1 - Authorship in Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery
AU - Gadjradj, Pravesh S.
AU - Jalimsing, Mamta
AU - Jalimsing, Sandhia
AU - Voigt, Istifari
N1 - Publisher Copyright: © 2021, The Author(s).
PY - 2021/6
Y1 - 2021/6
N2 - Background and Objective: According to the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), authorship should be offered based on fulfilling four criteria. Honorary authorship (HA) is a term used for authors enlisted who did not fulfill these criteria. The objective of this study was to determine the proportion of HA in the field of oral and maxillofacial surgery. Material and Methods: In 2020, a twenty-two question survey was sent to corresponding authors of four high-impact journals in the field of oral and maxillofacial surgery. The survey covered (1) demographics, (2) awareness of authorship guidelines and decision-making of authorship, and (3) honorary authorship. Results: The response rate was 24.8%. Of the respondents, 81.1% was aware of the issue of guidelines on authorship, while 56.3% was aware of the issue of HA. Yet, 15.5% of the respondents felt that one or more of their co-authors did not deserve authorship based on the ICMJE-guidelines. Conclusion: Based on the estimated proportions of HA, attempts should be made by universities, medical journals and individual researchers to further reduce authorship misuse.
AB - Background and Objective: According to the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), authorship should be offered based on fulfilling four criteria. Honorary authorship (HA) is a term used for authors enlisted who did not fulfill these criteria. The objective of this study was to determine the proportion of HA in the field of oral and maxillofacial surgery. Material and Methods: In 2020, a twenty-two question survey was sent to corresponding authors of four high-impact journals in the field of oral and maxillofacial surgery. The survey covered (1) demographics, (2) awareness of authorship guidelines and decision-making of authorship, and (3) honorary authorship. Results: The response rate was 24.8%. Of the respondents, 81.1% was aware of the issue of guidelines on authorship, while 56.3% was aware of the issue of HA. Yet, 15.5% of the respondents felt that one or more of their co-authors did not deserve authorship based on the ICMJE-guidelines. Conclusion: Based on the estimated proportions of HA, attempts should be made by universities, medical journals and individual researchers to further reduce authorship misuse.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85102785123&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s12663-021-01538-9
DO - 10.1007/s12663-021-01538-9
M3 - Article
C2 - 33911405
AN - SCOPUS:85102785123
SN - 0972-8279
VL - 20
SP - 330
EP - 335
JO - Journal of Maxillofacial and Oral Surgery
JF - Journal of Maxillofacial and Oral Surgery
IS - 2
ER -