Honorary authorship in biomedical journals: how common is it and why does it exist?

Waleed Al–Herz · Hani H. Haider · Mahmoud Al-Bahhar · Adnan Sadeq

85 citations0/0 files storedJournal of Medical Ethics

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Academic integrity and plagiarism scientometrics and bibliometrics research Pharmaceutical industry and healthcare

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The number of coauthors in the medical literature has increased over the past 50 years as authorship continues to have important academic, social and financial implications. AIM AND METHOD: The study aim was to determine the prevalence of honorary authorship in biomedical publications and identify the factors that lead to its existence. An email with a survey link was sent anonymously to 9283 corresponding authors of PubMed articles published within 1 year of contact. RESULTS: A completed survey was obtained from 1246 corresponding authors, a response rate of 15.75%. One-third (33.4%) admitted that they had added authors who did not deserve authorship credit. Origin of the study from Europe and Asia (p ≤ 0.001 and 0.005, respectively), study type as case report/case series (p=0.036) and increasing number of coauthors were found to be the associated factors on multivariate analysis. Journal impact factor was also found to be associated with honorary authorship (mean journal impact factor was 4.82 (SD 6.32) for those who self-reported honorary authorship and 5.60 (SD 7.13) for those who did not report unjust authorship, p=0.05). In retrospect, 75% of the authors indicated that they would remove unjustified names from the authorship list. Reasons for adding honorary authors were complimentary (39.4%), to avoid conflict at work (16.1%), to facilitate article acceptance (7.2%), and other (3.6%). CONCLUSIONS: Honorary authorship is relatively common in biomedical publications. Researchers should comply with the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors' criteria for authorship.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 85 citations exist upstream.

References

2005Scientists behaving badly 1998Prevalence of Articles With Honorary Authors and Ghost Authors in Peer-Reviewed Medical Journals 2011Honorary and ghost authorship in high impact biomedical journals: a cross sectional survey 2002Prevalence of Honorary and Ghost Authorship in Cochrane Reviews 1999Disclosure of Researcher Contributions: A Study of Original Research Articles in The Lancet 2009Recognition, reward and responsibility: Why the authorship of scientific papers matters 2011Honorary Authorship in Radiologic Research Articles: Assessment of Frequency and Associated Factors

Cited by

2015Ongoing ethical issues concerning authorship in biomedical journals: an integrative review 2019Researchers’ Perceptions of Ethical Authorship Distribution in Collaborative Research Teams 2023Quantitative research assessment: using metrics against gamed metrics 2024Evolving patterns of extreme publishing behavior across science 2017Transparency in Authors’ Contributions and Responsibilities to Promote Integrity in Scientific Publication 2018El plagio y las revistas depredadoras como amenaza a la integridad científica

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.