Effects of author contribution disclosures and numeric limitations on authorship trends

Robert McDonald, Kevin L. Neff, Melissa L. Rethlefsen, David F Kallmes

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

29 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether editorial policies designed to eliminate gratuitous authorship (globally referred to as authorship limitation policies), including author contribution disclosures and/ or numeric restrictions, have significantly affected authorship trends during a 20-year period. METHODS: We used a custom PERL-based algorithm to extract data, including number of authors, publication date, and article subtype, from articles published from January 1, 1986, through December 31, 2006, in 16 medical journals (8 with explicit authorship guidelines restricting authorship and 8 without formal authorship policies), comprising 307,190 articles. Trends in the mean number of authors per article, sorted by journal type, article subtype, and presence of authorship limitations, were determined using Sen's slope analysis and compared using analysis of variance and matched-pair analysis. Trend data were compared among the journals that had implemented 1 or both of these formal restrictive authorship policies and those that had not in order to determine their effect on authorship over time. RESULTS: The number of authors per article has been increasing among all journals at a mean ± SD rate of 0.076±0.057 authors per article per year. No significant differences in authorship rate were observed between journals with and without authorship limits before enforcement (F=1.097; P=.30). After enforcement, no significant change in authorship rates was observed (matched pair: F=0.425; P=.79). CONCLUSION: Implementation of authorship limitation policies does not slow the trend of increasing numbers of authors per article over time.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)920-927
Number of pages8
JournalMayo Clinic Proceedings
Volume85
Issue number10
DOIs
StatePublished - 2010

Fingerprint

Authorship
Disclosure
Editorial Policies
Matched-Pair Analysis

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Effects of author contribution disclosures and numeric limitations on authorship trends. / McDonald, Robert; Neff, Kevin L.; Rethlefsen, Melissa L.; Kallmes, David F.

In: Mayo Clinic Proceedings, Vol. 85, No. 10, 2010, p. 920-927.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{ef04b547ef1449759fc19e0645e64382,
title = "Effects of author contribution disclosures and numeric limitations on authorship trends",
abstract = "OBJECTIVE: To determine whether editorial policies designed to eliminate gratuitous authorship (globally referred to as authorship limitation policies), including author contribution disclosures and/ or numeric restrictions, have significantly affected authorship trends during a 20-year period. METHODS: We used a custom PERL-based algorithm to extract data, including number of authors, publication date, and article subtype, from articles published from January 1, 1986, through December 31, 2006, in 16 medical journals (8 with explicit authorship guidelines restricting authorship and 8 without formal authorship policies), comprising 307,190 articles. Trends in the mean number of authors per article, sorted by journal type, article subtype, and presence of authorship limitations, were determined using Sen's slope analysis and compared using analysis of variance and matched-pair analysis. Trend data were compared among the journals that had implemented 1 or both of these formal restrictive authorship policies and those that had not in order to determine their effect on authorship over time. RESULTS: The number of authors per article has been increasing among all journals at a mean ± SD rate of 0.076±0.057 authors per article per year. No significant differences in authorship rate were observed between journals with and without authorship limits before enforcement (F=1.097; P=.30). After enforcement, no significant change in authorship rates was observed (matched pair: F=0.425; P=.79). CONCLUSION: Implementation of authorship limitation policies does not slow the trend of increasing numbers of authors per article over time.",
author = "Robert McDonald and Neff, {Kevin L.} and Rethlefsen, {Melissa L.} and Kallmes, {David F}",
year = "2010",
doi = "10.4065/mcp.2010.0291",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "85",
pages = "920--927",
journal = "Mayo Clinic Proceedings",
issn = "0025-6196",
publisher = "Elsevier Science",
number = "10",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Effects of author contribution disclosures and numeric limitations on authorship trends

AU - McDonald, Robert

AU - Neff, Kevin L.

AU - Rethlefsen, Melissa L.

AU - Kallmes, David F

PY - 2010

Y1 - 2010

N2 - OBJECTIVE: To determine whether editorial policies designed to eliminate gratuitous authorship (globally referred to as authorship limitation policies), including author contribution disclosures and/ or numeric restrictions, have significantly affected authorship trends during a 20-year period. METHODS: We used a custom PERL-based algorithm to extract data, including number of authors, publication date, and article subtype, from articles published from January 1, 1986, through December 31, 2006, in 16 medical journals (8 with explicit authorship guidelines restricting authorship and 8 without formal authorship policies), comprising 307,190 articles. Trends in the mean number of authors per article, sorted by journal type, article subtype, and presence of authorship limitations, were determined using Sen's slope analysis and compared using analysis of variance and matched-pair analysis. Trend data were compared among the journals that had implemented 1 or both of these formal restrictive authorship policies and those that had not in order to determine their effect on authorship over time. RESULTS: The number of authors per article has been increasing among all journals at a mean ± SD rate of 0.076±0.057 authors per article per year. No significant differences in authorship rate were observed between journals with and without authorship limits before enforcement (F=1.097; P=.30). After enforcement, no significant change in authorship rates was observed (matched pair: F=0.425; P=.79). CONCLUSION: Implementation of authorship limitation policies does not slow the trend of increasing numbers of authors per article over time.

AB - OBJECTIVE: To determine whether editorial policies designed to eliminate gratuitous authorship (globally referred to as authorship limitation policies), including author contribution disclosures and/ or numeric restrictions, have significantly affected authorship trends during a 20-year period. METHODS: We used a custom PERL-based algorithm to extract data, including number of authors, publication date, and article subtype, from articles published from January 1, 1986, through December 31, 2006, in 16 medical journals (8 with explicit authorship guidelines restricting authorship and 8 without formal authorship policies), comprising 307,190 articles. Trends in the mean number of authors per article, sorted by journal type, article subtype, and presence of authorship limitations, were determined using Sen's slope analysis and compared using analysis of variance and matched-pair analysis. Trend data were compared among the journals that had implemented 1 or both of these formal restrictive authorship policies and those that had not in order to determine their effect on authorship over time. RESULTS: The number of authors per article has been increasing among all journals at a mean ± SD rate of 0.076±0.057 authors per article per year. No significant differences in authorship rate were observed between journals with and without authorship limits before enforcement (F=1.097; P=.30). After enforcement, no significant change in authorship rates was observed (matched pair: F=0.425; P=.79). CONCLUSION: Implementation of authorship limitation policies does not slow the trend of increasing numbers of authors per article over time.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=77957947541&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=77957947541&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.4065/mcp.2010.0291

DO - 10.4065/mcp.2010.0291

M3 - Article

C2 - 20884825

AN - SCOPUS:77957947541

VL - 85

SP - 920

EP - 927

JO - Mayo Clinic Proceedings

JF - Mayo Clinic Proceedings

SN - 0025-6196

IS - 10

ER -