Cómo determinar en forma transparente y justa las autorías de un trabajo de investigación / How to determine in a transparent and fair way the authors of a research paper abstract

Para que una persona sea merecedora de la autoría de una investigación debe haber realizado alguna contribución académica sustancial para que esta pudiera llevarse a cabo y, además, ser capaz de dar cuenta públicamente de la integridad de sus procesos y sus resultados. Este artículo resume: 1) la matriz propuesta por L. W. Roberts para contribuir a definir las autorías durante las etapas iniciales de la investigación, 2) los criterios de autoría del Comité Internacional de Editores de Revistas Médicas para definir quiénes merecen dichos créditos y quiénes no, 3) la taxonomía de 14 roles propuesta por la Declaración CRediT para transparentar las tareas realizadas por cada una de las personas proclamadas autoras de una investigación biomédica y 4) las principales conductas que degradan la transparencia de las autorías. (AU)

For a person to deserve an investigation authorship he/she must have made some substantial academic contribution so that that research could be carried out and, in addition, must be able to publicly account for the integrity of their processes and their results. This article summarizes: 1) the matrix proposed by Roberts to help defining authorship during the initial stages of the investigation; 2) authorship criteria of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors to define who deserves such credits and who does not; 3) the 14-role taxonomy proposed by the CRediT Declaration to transparent the tasks performed by each of the proclaimed authors of a biomedical research; 4) the main behaviors that degrade the transparency of authorships. (AU)

Autoría de regalo: una aproximación a su frecuencia en una revista peruana / Gift authorship: An approach to its frequency in a Peruvian journal

Resumen Introducción. La autoría injustificada o 'autoría de regalo' es una práctica inadecuada que consiste en nombrar como autores a personas que no cumplen los criterios de autoría. Los informes de investigaciones científicas suelen ser publicados como artículos originales en revistas científicas y pueden presentar estas prácticas inadecuadas. Objetivos. Determinar la prevalencia de autoría de regalo en publicaciones de artículos originales. Materiales y métodos. Se trata de un estudio descriptivo en el cual se revisó la sección de contribuciones de autoría de todos los artículos publicados en una revista peruana desde enero de 2013 hasta marzo de 2017. Se consideró una autoría de regalo cuando un autor no cumplía con, al menos, uno de los criterios establecidos por el International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). Resultados. De los 209 artículos originales publicados, 11 fueron excluidos debido a que no reportaron las contribuciones de autoría. La prevalencia de autoría de regalo de los 198 artículos incluidos fue de 106 (53,5 %). Los criterios que menos cumplieron fueron la aprobación final del manuscrito (23,2 %), y su redacción y revisión crítica (16,8 %). Conclusiones. Es necesario que las instituciones educativas capaciten a los investigadores para que discriminen entre autoría y contribución. Además, es necesario que las revistas soliciten y corroboren las contribuciones reportadas.

Abstract Introduction: Unjustified authorship or "gift authorship" is an inadequate practice of authorship that consists of naming as authors people who do not meet the authorship criteria. Reports of scientific research are often published as original articles in scientific journals and may present these inappropriate practices. Objective: Determine the prevalence of gift authorship in original articles for publication. Materials and methods:. Descriptive study in which the authorship contributions section of all the articles published between 2013 and the first quarter of 2017 in a Peruvian magazine was reviewed. Gift authorship was considered when an author did not meet at least one of the criteria established by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). Results: Of the 209 original articles published, 11 were excluded because they did not report authorship contributions. The prevalence of gift authorship was 53.5% (106). The critreria least met were the final approval of the manuscript (23.2%) and the writing and critical review of this manuscript. (16.8%). Conclusions: It is necessary that educational institutions train researchers to distinguish between authorship and contribution. In addition, it is necessary that the journals request and corroborate the reported contributions.

Cómo tener éxito al empezar a publicar en revistas médicas. Consideraciones para autores inexpertos, que podrían interesar también a los expertos / How can you succeed in having your manuscript published in a medical journal. Advices to inexpert authors that can also be useful to senior authors

Young authors may benefit by some advices on how to proceed when they decide to write a manuscript and submit it to a medical journal. They should start by selecting the journal considering the topic and nature of their study, how relevant the results seem and the interest it may have in editors and readers. A reasonable choice should consider new journals that publish good papers selected after external peer review. Then they should study and follow the Instructions to Authors of the chosen journal. A strong call is given to recognize and avoid "predatory journals". Specific statements refer to Instructions to Authors and language requirements by the journal, the need to follow "ICMJE Recommendations", the correct assignment of authorship, and a strict observance of ethical regulations in biomedical and clinical research. Special mention is given to provide a good abstract, in English, either descriptive or structured depending on the nature of their study. These advices may be useful as well as a reminder to older authors on how to improve their manuscripts before submitting them to a mainstream medical journal.

Preserving the Integrity of Citations and References by All Stakeholders of Science Communication

Citations to scholarly items are building bricks for multidisciplinary science communication. Citation analyses are currently influencing individual career advancement and ranking of academic and research institutions worldwide. This article overviews the involvement of scientific authors, reviewers, editors, publishers, indexers, and learned associations in the citing and referencing to preserve the integrity of science communication. Authors are responsible for thorough bibliographic searches to select relevant references for their articles, comprehend main points, and cite them in an ethical way. Reviewers and editors may perform additional searches and recommend missing essential references. Publishers, in turn, are in a position to instruct their authors over the citations and references, provide tools for validation of references, and open access to bibliographies. Publicly available reference lists bear important information about the novelty and relatedness of the scholarly items with the published literature. Few editorial associations have dealt with the issue of citations and properly managed references. As a prime example, the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) issued in December 2014 an updated set of recommendations on the need for citing primary literature and avoiding unethical references, which are applicable to the global scientific community. With the exponential growth of literature and related references, it is critically important to define functions of all stakeholders of science communication in curbing the issue of irrational and unethical citations and thereby improve the quality and indexability of scholarly journals.

Authorship of scientific articles within an ethical-legal framework:quantitative model / Autoría en artículos científicos dentro de un marco ético legal: modelo cuantitativo

En la ciencia moderna,interdisciplinaria e interinstitucional, definir quién es autor y el ordende autoría en artículos científicos se ha convertido en problema anivel ético y legal. No aclarar la autoría antes o durante la realizaciónde la investigación genera problemas entre los que se consideranautores. Este artículo propone un formato cuantitativo y cualitativopara determinar autorías dentro del marco científico, ético y legal.Los principios utilizados para la construcción de este formato sefundamentaron en 2 criterios: a) fases de investigación y métodocientífico; involucrando: 1. planificación y elaboración del proyectode investigación, 2. diseño y obtención de datos, 3. presentaciónde resultados, 4. interpretación de resultados, 5. preparación delmanuscrito para la difusión del nuevo conocimiento, y 6. administracióny gestión; y b) coeficientes de ponderación en cada fase, para tomardecisiones de autoría y titularidad de obra. De la misma manera elformato considera y diferencia que fase y actividad, realizada dentro dela creación de la obra y difusión del conocimiento, es aporte práctico ointelectual; lo cual contrasta y complementa lo que la ley de derechosde autor protege. El formato es aplicable apriori y a posteriori a larealización de un proyecto o manuscrito y adaptable a cualquier tipode investigación y publicación, resolviendo cuantitativamente: 1.Orden de autores (primer autor y orden de coautores), 2. Inclusión yexclusión de colaboradores considerando principios éticos y legales y3. Porcentajes de derecho patrimonial para cada autor...

Determining authorship and the order of authorship inscientific papers, in modern interdisciplinary and interinstitutionalscience, has become complex at a legal and ethical level. Failureto define authorship before or during the research, createssubsequent problems for those considered authors of a publicationor lead authors of a work, particularly so, once the project ormanuscript is completed. This article proposes a quantitativeand qualitative model to determine authorship within a scientific,ethical and legal frame. The principles used for the constructionof this design are based on 2 criteria: a) stages of research andscientific method involving: 1. Planning and development of theresearch project, 2. Design and data collection, 3. Presentationof results, 4. Interpretation of results, 5. Manuscript preparationto disseminate new knowledge to the scientific community, 6.Administration and management, and b) weighting coefficients ineach phase, to decide on authorship and ownership of the work.The model also considers and distinguishes whether the leveland activity performed during the creation of the work and thediffusion of knowledge is an intellectual or practical contribution;this distinction both contrasts and complements the elementsprotected by copyright laws. The format can be applied a prioriand a posteriori to the completion of a project or manuscript andcan conform to any research and publication type. The use ofthis format will quantitatively resolve: 1. The order of authorship(first author and co-author order), 2. Determine the inclusion andexclusion of contributors, taking into account ethical and legalprinciples, and 3. Percentages of economic rights for each authors...

Na ciência moderna, interdisciplinar e inter-institucional,a definição do que é um autor e da ordem de autoría em trabalhoscientíficos tornou-se um problema de ética e legal. A carência de definirautoría, antes ou durante a realização de pesquisas, gera problemasentre os autores considerados. Este artigo propõe um formatoquantitativo e qualitativo para determinar a autoría dentro de umaestrutura científica, ética e legal. Os princípios utilizados na construçãodeste formato basearam-se em dois critérios: a) as fases do método depesquisa científica, envolvendo: 1. planejamento e escrito da pesquisa,2. delineamento e coleta de dados, 3. apresentação dos resultados,4. interpretação dos resultados, 5. preparação do manuscrito para adivulgação de novos conhecimentos, e 6. administração e gestão, e, b)as fases ponderadas, para tomar decisões de autoría e de propriedadeda obra. O formato considera e inclui a diferença entre fase e atividade,realizadas dentro da criação da obra e disseminação do conhecimento,a contribuição intelectual ou prática, que contrasta e complementa oque a lei protege em direitos de autor. O formato se aplica apriori ea posteriori à conclusão de um projeto ou manuscrito e é adaptável aqualquer tipo de pesquisa e publicação, resolvendo quantitativamente:1. a ordem de autores (primeiro autor e co-autores), 2. inclusão eexclusão de contribuintes, considerando os princípios éticos e legais, e3. os percentuais de direitos econômicos para cada autor...

Critérios para autoria de um trabalho científico / Criteria for autorship of a scientific work

Durante a elaboração de um trabalho científico, uma das dificuldades que por ventura podem ocorrer é a escolha dos participantes da pesquisa que devem compor a sua autoria. Situação ainda mais desagradável é a ordenação dos autores, de acordo com o mérito de cada um no trabalho. Objetivo:apresentar, de maneira justificada, uma proposta para a autoria do trabalho científico, de acordo com a contribuição de cada membro da equipe de pesquisadores. Métodos: foi realizada uma avaliação da maneira de propor a autoria científica nos principais centros de pesquisa do Brasil e na literatura pertinente, para a aquisição de subsídios com vistas a esta proposta. Resultados: são apresentados em ordem de entrada os principais autores do trabalho e aqueles que devem merecer apenas agradecimento. Propõe-se uma escala numérica, de acordo com a participação de cada membro da equipe, para facilitara inclusão de cada um dos autores. Conclusão: o mérito da autoria científica deve ser restrito aos participantes que tiveram uma colaboração intelectual ao trabalho realizado, aliada a uma contribuição efetiva para a pesquisa ser realizada e concluída.

During the development of a scientific research, one of the main difficulties is to choose the authors of the paper from all participants of thein vestigation. The organization of the authorship, based on the contribution of each investigator is still more complex. Objective: to propose a justified indicator for the authorship of a scientific paper. Methods: the author investigated the main research centers in Brazil in order to know their philosophy related to the authorship of a research. An assessment of the literature completed this study. Results: we present and justify the order of each investigator inthe authorship or acknowledgment of the paper, based on his or her participation in the investigation. Conclusion: the investigator deserves to be includedas an author of a scientific paper only if he or she has an intellectual participation in the work and also effectively contributed with the execution and accomplishment of the research.

Políticas de conflito de interesses e exigências para divulgação em Revistas Científicas de Cardiologia Nacionais da Sociedade Europeia de Cardiologia / Conflict of interest policies and disclosure requirements among European Society of Cardiology National Cardiovascular Journals

A divulgação de possíveis conflitos de interesses (COI) é um recurso utilizado por revistas científicas biomédicas para garantir a credibilidade e transparência do processo científico. No entanto, a divulgação de COI não constitui um foco sistemático ou consistente das revistas científicas. As recentes ações editoriais conjuntas prepararam o terreno para a implementação de veículos uniformes para a divulgação de COI. Este artigo fornece uma perspectiva editorial abrangente de questões clássicas associadas a COI. Discutem-se, ademais, perspectivas sobre as políticas e práticas atuais de COI de revistas científicas de cardiologia nacionais da Sociedade Europeia de Cardiologia, tendo como base uma pesquisa transversal utilizando um questionário padronizado.

Disclosure of potential conflicts of interest (COI) is used by biomedical journals to guarantee credibility and transparency of the scientific process. COI disclosure, however, is not systematically nor consistently dealt with by journals. Recent joint editorial efforts paved the way towards the implementation of uniform vehicles for COI disclosure. This paper provides a comprehensive editorial perspective on classical COI-related issues. New insights into current COI policies and practices among European Society of Cardiology national cardiovascular journals, as derived from a cross-sectional survey using a standardised questionnaire, are discussed.

Políticas de conflictos de intereses y requisitos para su declaración en las revistas cardiovasculares nacionales de la Sociedad Europea de Cardiología / Conflict of interest policies and disclosure requirements among european society of cardiology national cardiovascular journals

Las revistas biomédicas utilizan la declaración de posibles conflictos de intereses para garantizar la credibilidad y la transparencia del proceso científico. Sin embargo, las revistas no abordan la declaración de conflictos de intereses de manera sistemática ni uniforme. Recientes esfuerzos editoriales conjuntos han abierto el camino a la aplicación de herramientas uniformes para la declaración de conflictos de intereses. En este artículo se presenta una visión integral sobre cuestiones clásicas relacionadas con los conflictos de intereses desde un punto de vista editorial. Además, a partir de los datos de un estudio transversal basado en el empleo de un cuestionario estandarizado, se comentan nuevas apreciaciones sobre las políticas y los actuales procedimientos editoriales relativos a los conflictos de intereses en las diversas revistas cardiovasculares nacionales de la Sociedad Europea de Cardiología.

Disclosure of potential conflicts of interest is used by biomedical journals to guarantee credibility and transparency of the scientific process. Conflict of interest disclosure, however, is not systematically nor consistently dealt with by journals. Recent joint editorial efforts paved the way towards the implementation of uniform vehicles for conflicts of interest disclosure. This paper provides a comprehensive editorial perspective on classical conflict of interest-related issues. New insights into current conflicts of interest policies and practices among European Society of Cardiology national cardiovascular journals, as derived from a cross-sectional survey using a standardized questionnaire, are discussed.

Distribuição da autoria em trabalhos científicos / Distribution of authorship in a scientific work

INTRODUÇÃO: Publicar tornou-se quase obrigatório em Medicina. Não há dúvida quanto à importância de publicar a pesquisa, porém a ordenação de seus autores não é tarefa fácil. A falta de critérios internacionalmente aceitos levou ao estabelecimento de diversas convenções particularizadas a grupos ou setores médicos e científicos. OBJETIVO: Apresentar método numérico para estabelecer regra de valor para as pessoas que realizaram a pesquisa, e serem ou não incorporadas como autores. MÉTODO: A proposta baseia-se em pontuar as necessidades de cada etapa ao se realizar um trabalho científico. Elas foram divididas em tópicos, nos quais os principais foram: 1) critérios relativos à autoria científica; 2) criar a ideia que originou o trabalho e elaborar hipóteses; 3) estruturar o método de trabalho; 4) orientar o trabalho; 5) escrever o manuscrito; 6) coordenar o grupo que realizou o trabalho; 7) rever a literatura; 8) apresentar sugestões incorporadas ao trabalho; 9) resolver problemas fundamentais do trabalho; 10) coletar dados; 11) apresentação do trabalho em eventos científicos; 12) chefiar o local do trabalho e conseguir verbas; 13) fornecer pacientes ou material; 14) trabalhar na rotina da função; 15) participar mediante pagamento específico; 16) critérios para ordenar os autores; 17) autor honorário; 18) usurpar a autoria principal; 19) agradecimentos. CONCLUSÕES: É importante reforçar que, para prevenir conflitos maiores, o grupo que se dispõe a realizar um trabalho científico deve estabelecer no início, da forma mais objetiva possível, os critérios que serão adotados para distribuição da autoria. Esses critérios evitam interferências subjetivas e previnem conflitos de interesse.

INTRODUCTION: To publish became almost compulsory in Medicine. There is no doubt about the importance of publishing research, but the ordering of its authors is not easy. The lack of internationally accepted criteria led to the establishment of several groups or conventions particularized medical and scientific sectors. OBJETIVE: To present numerical method to establish rule of value to people who carried out the research, and whether or not incorporated as authors. METHOD: The proposed score is based on the needs of each step when conducting a scientific work. They were divided into topics in which the main ones were: 1) scientific criteria for authorship; 2) create the idea that originated the work and develop hypotheses; 3) structure the method of work; 4) guiding the work; 5) write the manuscript; 6) coordinate the group that carried out the work; 7) reviewing the literature; 8) suggestions incorporated into the work; 9) to solve fundamental problems of labor; 10) to collect data; 11) presentation at scientific meetings; 12 ) lead the job and raise funds; 13) providing patients or material; 14) to do the routine needs; 15) specific fee to participate; 16) criteria for ranking the authors; 17) honorary author; 18) usurpation of the main authorship, 19) acknowledgments . CONCLUSIONS: It is important to emphasize that, to prevent major conflicts, the group that is willing to conduct a scientific work should establish at the outset, as objectively as possible, the criteria to be adopted for distribution of authorship. The subjective criteria here proposed avoid interference and prevent conflicts of interest.