In the Name of God

1. In the Name of God

2. Topics for discussion • Authors ( Pysically ! ) - Title page - Different journal formats

3. Topics for discussion • Authorship ( Metaphysically ! ) - Importance and sensitivity - Definitions and criteria - Problems - Solutions

4. Title page • Names • Highest academic degree • Affiliation • The name of the department(s) and institution(s) to which the work should be attributed • Disclaimers if any to be continued

5. Title page • Corresponding authors. The name, mailing address, telephone and fax numbers, and e-mail address • The name and address of the author to whom requests for reprints should be addressed or a statement that reprints will not be available from the authors • Source of support in the form of grants, equipment, drugs

6. Uniform requirement and corresponding author • The corresponding author should indicate clearly whether his or her e-mail address is to be published. • Corresponding author : responsible for correspondence about the manuscript (may or may not be the "guarantor" for the integrity of the study as a whole, if someone is identified in that role. )

7. Authors’ Names - Full Names - Order - If > 2 authors , separate by commas except for last one ( , and )

8. Academic degree • Usually the highest one • Sometimes no more than two graduate degrees eg NEJM

9. Authors’ address • Should conform to the style of the journal • Should be complete

10. Do not forget that A basic rule is to read the instructions to authors.

11. Authorship - Importance and sensitivity - Definitions and criteria - Problems - Solutions

12. Importance of authorship Scientists "invest their lives in their research and in each manuscript"

13. Importance of authorship • Academic life revolves around publication • Publication brings fame • Research evaluation is based on publication • Grants depend on/demand publication

14. Publication evaluation • Quantity • Quality

15. Decision about Authorship The most sensitive part of writing a paper

16. Authorship • Definition and Criteria

17. Uniform Requirements • II.A Authorship and Contributorship • II.A.1. Byline Authors • “Author" : someone who has made substantive intellectual contributions to a published study

18. Uniform Requirements Authorship credit should be based on 1) substantial contributions to conception and design, or acquisition of data, or analysis and interpretation of data; 2) drafting the article or revising it critically for important intellectual content; and 3) final approval of the version to be published. Authors should meet conditions 1, 2, and 3.

19. Uniform Requirements Acquisition of funding, collection of data, or general supervision of the research group, alone, does not justify authorship.

20. Uniform Requirements Each author should have participated sufficiently in the work to take public responsibility for appropriate portions of the content.

21. Uniform Requirements Some journals now also request that one or more authors, referred to as "guarantors," be identified as the persons who take responsibility for the integrity of the work as a whole, from inception to published article, and publish that information.

22. Uniform Requirements Increasingly, authorship of multi-center trials is attributed to a group. All members of the group who are named as authors should fully meet the above criteria for authorship.

23. Why ?! The publication system demands that everyone who is an author is deeply involved in the project so that the group of scientists claiming authorship can also share responsibility.

24. Authorship • both • accountability & • independence

25. Order of authors’ names Order of the author should be a joint decision of the authors

26. Order of authors’s names The sequence of authors should be determined by the relative overall contributions to the manuscript

27. Order of authors’s names It is common practice to have the senior author appear last, sometimes regardless of his or her contribution.

28. First Author Should have ... adapted a hypothesis defined precise methods participated in a major way in analysis and interpretation of results written the paper

29. First Author The first author should be that person who contributed most to the work, including writing of the manuscript

30. Co-Author Should have made significant contributions to the planning and execution of the research, the methods and procedures, the collection and analysis of the data, etc.

31. Senior Author formulated the original hypothesis or provided significant intellectual resources & provided constructive criticism of the manuscript & accepted responsibility for the findings and the authorship

32. For young authors There are two positions that count: firstandlast. And attached to either position is the status associated with being the author for correspondence.

33. For young authors The best combination is to be first author and the author for correspondence.

34. As your career progresses, being last author and author for correspondence signals that this is a paper from your lab, you are the main person responsible for its contents, and a younger colleague has made major contributions to the paper, hence they are listed first.

35. Order of authors’ names The senior author sometimes takes responsibility for writing the paper, especially when the research student has not yet learned the skills of scientific writing. The senior author then becomes the corresponding author, but should the student be the first author?

36. Order of authors’ names Some supervisors put their students first, others put their own names first. Perhaps it should be decided on the absolute amount of time spent on the project by the student (in getting the data) and the supervisor (in providing help and in writing the paper). Or perhaps the supervisor should be satisfied with being corresponding author, regardless of time committed to the project

37. Order of authors’ names A sensible policy adopted by many supervisors is to give the student a fixed period of time to write the first draft of the paper. If the student does not deliver, the supervisor may then write the paper and put her or his own name first.

38. Most scientists have their own policy ! Whatever policy your supervisor or colleagues have, there are usually good reasons for them: tradition, experience, or just the plain old selfish genes that we all carry.

39. How to avoid problems with authorship? • First, agree with your collaborators that you will follow the international guidelines. • Second, agree before starting the research who will be an author, and if necessary discuss why each person should be an author. • Third, agree on the tentative order of authors and on who will be corresponding author.

40. Honorary vs Ghost ! • Honorary authors: named authors who have not met authorship criteria • Ghost authors : individuals not named as authors but who contributed substantially to the work

41. Prevalence of Articles With Honorary Authors and Ghost Authors in Peer-Reviewed Medical Journals - 19% had evidence of honorary authors - 11% had evidence of ghost authors - 2% had evidence of both. (JAMA. 1998;280:222-224)

42. Honorary authorship • Three large studies • 26% of 1,014 authors in 10 journals(Shapiro et al 1994) • 17% of 884 authors in AJR (Sloan1996) • 19% of 809 articles in Ann Intern Med,JAMA, N Engl J Med

43. Honarary authorship • Three specialty journals(Flanagin et al, 1998)— • 16% of research articles • 26% of review articles • 21% of editorials and commentaries

44. Gost authorship • Largest study • 11% of 809 articles in Ann Intern Med, JAMA,N Engl J Med • Three specialty journals(Flanagin et al, 1998) • 13% of research articles • 10% of review articles • 6% of editorials and commentaries

45. Authorship–What Doesn’t Count • Providing or recruiting study patients or other material • Collecting interview data or other specimens or measurements  • Coordinating the data collection process

46. Authorship–What Doesn’t Count • Supervision of first author, Chair of dept., Chief of division, director of laboratory, etc. • Statistical advice (alone) • Data entry, processing, or management • Providing or helping obtain space, money, staff, or other resources

47. Authors’ contributionvsContributors

48. Example for authors’ contribution Shahin Akhondzadeh (principle investigator and statistical support , clinical neuropsychopharmacologist) Mohammad Reza Mohammadi (clinical coordinator, psychiatrist) Hassan Mohajeri (trialist ,resident of psychiatry ) Homayoun Amini (clinical coordinator , psychiatrist )

49. Comments on Vancouver criteria • The Vancouver criteria suggest that all authors should have a significant input tothe design, organisation, analysis and write up of a study. This is over the top, even with the best will in the world it is rarely possible for more than 3 people to have a significant input to all areas of a study. The authors would be falling over each other. to be continued

50. Comments on Vancouver criteria • In reality the best that is usually achieved is each author offers a specificexpertise and all authors comment on the final draft of the manuscript. Only theprimary author is truly involved in all aspects of the study. Stuart Derbyshire