https://totalinternalreflectionblog.com/2025/06/13/credit-where-credits-due-a-short-guide-to-authorships-in-scientific-papers/
Update. An editorial in _Annals of Internal Medicine_ responds to "Political Action That Threatens the Integrity of Medical Research."
https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/ANNALS-25-00985
"The editors have given a great deal of thought to actions Annals can take to counter some of this damage. Following an executive order that limited the ability of health agency staff to communicate externally, we quickly published all manuscripts with government-affiliated authors that were accepted but awaiting publication before we could receive a request to withdraw them. As a member of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors [#ICMJE], Annals helped develop and strongly endorses the guidance it posted in early February 2025 relevant to journals' responses to requests to withdraw, revise, or alter authorship of manuscripts in process at scientific journals. To date, we are unaware of any request to retract published articles that include banned terms or address issues the U.S. administration deems unsavory. If we receive such requests, Annals will not honor them. Retraction is warranted only when there is clear evidence of major errors or scientific misconduct that seriously compromise research findings."
#Censorship #DefendResearch #Medicine #Takedowns #Trump #USPol #USPolitics
Update. Statement from #TheLancet in response to recent US executive orders
https://www.thelancet.com/editorial-policies#anchor10
"The Lancet Group will be making no changes to our editorial policies regarding withdrawal, authorship change, inclusive language, or retraction. Ahead of publication, the withdrawal of submitted papers and authorship changes will only generally be considered if the written agreement of all authors is received. The Lancet Group will continue to recommend the use of inclusive language, accepting authors’ ultimate choice of terminology when it is scientifically accurate and respectful, and will continue to encourage authors to follow the Sex and Gender Equity in Research (SAGER) reporting guidelines. Published papers will only be corrected or retracted when they contain factual errors or if scientific misconduct has taken place. These policies are in line with recently issued guidance from the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors [#ICMJE]."
#Censorship #DefendResearch #DEI #Medicine #ScholComm #Takedowns #Trump #USPol #USPolitics
Update. The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (#ICMJE) has updated its guidance in light of recent actions by the #Trump administration.
https://www.icmje.org/news-and-editorials/icmje_guidance_notice.html
"If authors request removal or addition of an author after manuscript submission or publication, journal editors should seek an explanation and signed statement of agreement for the requested change from all listed authors including the author to be removed or added…Corrections are warranted for errors of fact that should have been recognized at the time of publication. Matters of debate and evolving science and methods are not errors. Retraction of published work is generally reserved for errors serious enough to invalidate results and conclusions and/or when there is scientific misconduct.."
#Censorship #DefendResearch #Medicine #ScholComm #Takedowns #USPol #USPolitics
Update. An editorial in #JAMA and the #JAMANetwork.
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2830748?guestAccessKey=47e4b56b-8f69-4ff3-a26e-3a66a88b2c67&linkId=753250407
"Some authors of scientific works in process have had to remove their names from publications for these publications to proceed; others have chosen to pause or withdraw their publications. While some of these actions are directly related to the executive order to #HHS employees to cease communications, many have been undertaken preemptively by authors who are not subject to the order but are presumably fearful of the challenges of communicating complex findings in this current environment. Some authors are engaging in anticipatory compliance by scrubbing from their manuscripts words they fear may be deemed, in the moment, politically unacceptable…We remain steadfast in our guidance to authors and readers across the JAMA Network journals and endorse and adhere to the standards set by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors [#ICMJE]…We will act flexibly, where appropriate, to ensure that censoring efforts will not silence the integrity of the scientific process or clear communication of scientific information important for health."
#Censorship #DefendResearch #Medicine #ScholComm #Takedowns #Trump #USPol #USPolitics
New study: More than one-third of public health #journals (33.7%) do not ask authors for data-sharing statements. Those that do request data-sharing statements are more likely to be #OpenAccess, high in #JIF, published in the UK, or endorsers of the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (#CONSORT).
https://www.jmir.org/2025/1/e64069
Note that "the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (#ICMJE) require[s] that all papers submitted after July 1, 2018, must include a data-sharing statement."
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2630773
Background: Data sharing plays a crucial role in health informatics, contributing to improving health information systems, enhancing operational efficiency, informing policy and decision-making, and advancing public health surveillance including disease tracking. Sharing individual participant data in public, environmental, and occupational health trials can help improve public trust and support by enhancing transparent reporting and reproducibility of research findings. The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) requires all papers to include a data-sharing statement. However, it is unclear whether journals in the field of public, environmental, and occupational health adhere to this requirement. Objective: This study aims to investigate whether public, environmental, and occupational health journals requested data-sharing statements from clinical trials submitted for publication. Methods: In this bibliometric survey of “Public, Environmental, and Occupational Health” journals, defined by the Journal Citation Reports (as of June 2023), we included 202 journals with clinical trial reports published between 2019 and 2022. The primary outcome was a journal request for a data-sharing statement, as identified in the paper submission instructions. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was conducted to evaluate the relationship between journal characteristics and journal requests for data-sharing statements, with results presented as odds ratios (ORs) and corresponding 95% CIs. We also investigated whether the journals included a data-sharing statement in their published trial reports. Results: Among the 202 public, environmental, and occupational health journals included, there were 68 (33.7%) journals that did not request data-sharing statements. Factors significantly associated with journal requests for data-sharing statements included open access status (OR 0.43, 95% CI 0.19-0.97), high journal impact factor (OR 2.31, 95% CI 1.15-4.78), endorsement of Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (OR 2.43, 95% CI 1.25-4.79), and publication in the United Kingdom (OR 7.18, 95% CI 2.61-23.4). Among the 134 journals requesting data-sharing statements, 26.9% (36/134) did not have statements in their published trial reports. Conclusions: Over one-third of the public, environmental, and occupational health journals did not request data-sharing statements in clinical trial reports. Among those journals that requested data-sharing statements in their submission guidance pages, more than one quarter published trial reports with no data-sharing statements. These results revealed an inadequate practice of requesting data-sharing statements by public, environmental, and occupational health journals, requiring more effort at the journal level to implement ICJME recommendations on data-sharing statements.
Update. The co-authors of this article (above) are "planning to launch an 'aggressive' outreach campaign to journals, publishers, universities, funders and organizations such as the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (#ICMJE) to implement their recommendations." Good.
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-023-01846-9
They've already launched a #petition you can sign to lend your weight. I just signed and hope you will too.
https://www.change.org/p/simplify-manuscript-submissions-in-academic-journals
A bit of fun exercising my mind around DORA* and authorship policies:
While immensely helpful for a range of purposes, does the #ICMJE statement around author- & contributorship structurally limit our view as to what we look for when evaluating individual's contributions to research?
https://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/roles-and-responsibilities/defining-the-role-of-authors-and-contributors.html
How much further do alternatives such as CRediT go?
https://credit.niso.org/