BMJ  2008;336:989 (3 May), doi:10.1136/bmj.39563.567847.94

Observations

Yankee Doodling

Who wrote that article?

The latest revelations about ghost authorship of journal articles are truly frightening

The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below.

Authorship issues are a common obsession of medical journal editors. We fuss about them a great deal, fretting about who contributed what to a paper, who was responsible for the work and its conclusions, and what should qualify a contributor to assume the august title of "author." The quantity and, to a lesser extent, the quality of authored publications have a lot to do with who gets promoted in academia, who gets tenured, and who gets jobs at prestigious universities. So naturally there is a great desire among academics to get their names on as many papers as possible, preferably at the head of the (often lengthy) list of authors.

I don’t think anyone in the outside world cares much about all of this. It’s easy to make fun of the competition, quibbling, and controversy surrounding authorship by reminding everyone of the old saw that the reason the politics are . . . [Full text of this article]

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

Related Article

Merck used ghostwriters and selective data in Vioxx publications, JAMA says

Janice Hopkins Tanne
BMJ 2008 336: 849. [Extract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Rapid Responses:

Read all Rapid Responses

Who is to be blamed?!

Sethi Bipin Kumar
bmj.com, 2 May 2008 [Full text]