The most prolific researchers may not be adhering to authorship guidelines
Medical research is a very competitive business, with a low success rate for grants and fellowships. To survive the competition, a researcher needs strong performance indicators, chief of which is the number of publications and associated citations. With publications, more is generally seen as better. However, I argue that very high publication rates should be seen as indicating poor authorship practices and should be discounted in evaluating track record.
The full article is accessible to AMA members and paid subscribers. Login to read more or purchase a subscription now.
Please note: institutional and Research4Life access to the MJA is now provided through Wiley Online Library.
- 1. National Health and Medical Research Council, Australian Research Council, Universities Australia. Australian Code for the Responsible Conduct of Research. Canberra: Australian Government, 2007.
- 2. Surowiecki J. The wisdom of crowds: why the many are smarter than the few. London: Abacus, 2004.
- 3. Santos I, Duarte C, Maher D, et al. Tackling unethical authorship deals on scientific publications. The Conversation. 2015; 2 Feb. http://theconversation.com/tackling-unethical-authorship-deals-on-scientific-publications-36294 (accessed Feb 2015).
I am supported by an NHMRC Senior Principal Research Fellowship.
According to Publish or Perish, I authored 36 articles in 2014.