Importance of authorship and inappropriate authorship assignment in paediatric research in low‐ and middle‐income countries
Objective To understand the importance of authorship and authorship position, and gauge perceptions of inappropriate authorship assignment, among authors publishing paediatric research conducted in low‐ and middle‐income countries (LMICs). Methods We conducted a cross‐sectional, mixed‐methods study...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Tropical medicine & international health 2019-10, Vol.24 (10), p.1229-1242 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Objective
To understand the importance of authorship and authorship position, and gauge perceptions of inappropriate authorship assignment, among authors publishing paediatric research conducted in low‐ and middle‐income countries (LMICs).
Methods
We conducted a cross‐sectional, mixed‐methods study using an online survey of both corresponding and randomly selected, non‐corresponding authors who published research conducted in LMICs from 2006 to 2015 in the top four paediatric journals by Eigenfactor score. We used chi‐square tests to compare responses by authors living in LMICs to authors living in high‐income countries (HICs). We analysed qualitative responses using thematic analysis.
Results
Of 1420 potential respondents, 19.6% (n = 279) completed the survey. 57% (n = 159) lived in LMICs and 43% (n = 120) in HICs. LMIC authors more commonly perceived first authorship as most important for their academic advancement than HIC authors (74.2% vs. 60.8%, P = 0.017), while HIC authors reported last authorship as most important (25.1% vs. 38.3%, P = 0.018). 65% (n = 181) of respondents believed that their collaborators had been inappropriately assigned authorship positions (no difference in LMIC and HIC responses) and 32.6% (n = 91) reported personally accepting inappropriate authorship positions (more common in HIC respondents, P = 0.005). In qualitative data, respondents questioned the applicability of standard authorship guidelines for collaborative research conducted in LMICs.
Conclusions
LMIC and HIC authors held different perceptions about the importance of authorship position. Reported inappropriate authorship assignment was common among both LMIC and HIC respondents. Alternatives to standard authorship criteria for research conducted in LMICs merit further studies.
Objectif
Comprendre l'importance de la paternité d'auteur et de la position de l'auteur, et évaluer les perceptions de l'attribution inappropriée de la paternité d'auteur parmi les auteurs qui publient des recherches pédiatriques menées dans des pays à revenu faible ou intermédiaire (PRFI).
Méthodes
Nous avons mené une étude transversale à méthodes mixtes avec un sondage en ligne auprès d'auteurs de correspondance et sélectionnés au hasard, d'auteurs not de correspondance, ayant publié des recherches menées dans des PRFIde 2006 à 2015 dans les quatre revues pédiatriques les mieux classées par le score d'Eigenfactor. Nous avons utilisé des tests de chi carré pour comparer les réponses des aute |
---|---|
ISSN: | 1360-2276 1365-3156 |
DOI: | 10.1111/tmi.13295 |