The Biomedical Advisory Committee of BGS agreed unanimously to develop a single policy on authorship for all biomedical graduate groups. This policy was devised in accordance with the Graduate Council of Faculties' Policy on Fairness of Authorship Credit in Collaborative Faculty-Student Publications.
Most journals in which BGS faculty and students would publish are represented in the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). This committee (formerly known as the Vancouver Group) has met annually since 1978 to develop and revise its Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals. Their Requirements form the basis of section 1 below, Qualifications for Authorship. Issues of authorship in publications by BGS students and faculty should be determined as follows:
1. Qualifications for Authorship[1] All persons designated as authors should qualify for authorship.
a. Each author should have participated sufficiently in the work to take public responsibility for the content
b. Authorship credit should be based only on substantial contributions to each of the following areas:
1. conception and design, or analysis and interpretation of data
2. drafting the article or revising it critically for important intellectual content
3. final approval of the version to be published
c. Conditions 1, 2, and 3 must all be met in assignment of authorship
d. Participation solely in the acquisition of funding or the collection of data does not justify authorship
e. General supervision of the research group is not sufficient for authorship
f. Appropriate credit for the contributions of other individuals to the work described in the publication should be made as an acknowledgment
g. Any part of an article critical to its main conclusions must be the responsibility of at least one author. If that author is a student, then the faculty mentor shares the responsibility
2. The Order of Authors[2]
a. The first author is that person who contributed most to the work, including writing of the manuscript (an author is a person who writes)
b. The sequence of author listing is determined by the relative contributions to the work. In the instance that equal credit is due, this should be footnoted (by asterisk) and it is suggested that authors be listed alphabetically (you may wish to note this policy on your CV)
c. Decisions about authors and the order in which their names appear should be discussed as early as possible, even at the outset
d. Decisions about authors and the order in which their names appear should be made by group consensus, and under the guidance of the lead investigator(s)
3. Other General Rules
a. The data presented in the publication must preserve full protection of patients' rights to privacy at their institution(s) as specified in informed consent and IRB approval documents
b. The data presented in the publication must be generated under the approval of, and in full compliance with, Animal and Human Subject codes at the authors' institution(s)
c. All authors are responsible for recognizing and disclosing financial and other conflicts of interest that might reasonably appear to bias their work
d. Decisions of the suitability of a manuscript for a particular journal should be made by group consensus and under the guidance of the lead investigator(s)
e. All items presented in the publication must be original (inclusive of other submitted publications), unless otherwise specifically stated in the publication
f. Secondary publication of manuscripts, either in full or in part, in review form, in another language and/or in another country, is justifiable provided that the authors have received approval from the editors of both journals, that the secondary manuscript includes a footnote to this effect, and that the secondary version faithfully reflects the data and interpretations of the primary version
g. In the instance of review articles, which may include previously published and/or unpublished data, appropriate acknowledgments must be made for published data, and appropriate consent must be received for unpublished data; however, generation of such data does not necessarily warrant authorship (for example, if a faculty member writes a review based on a student's published work and acknowledges the student' s contributions, the student does not necessarily have the right to coauthorship)
4. When Conflicts Arise
It is recognized that even when the above guidelines are followed, conflicts of opinion may arise. When disagreements cannot be resolved within the research group, the process for handling disagreements regarding authorship between students and faculty members is as follows:
a. The faculty member and student should seek mediation with the graduate group chair. If the faculty member wishes, his or her departmental chair may be included in this process as well
b. If mediation with the graduate group chair fails to satisfy both student and faculty member, the Director of BGS should be consulted. The Director of BGS will convene a committee of three BGS standing faculty members and one BGS student for arbitration. The committee will consider the opinions of the student, the faculty member, the graduate group chair, and, if appropriate, the faculty member's department chair. However, it must be understood that the opinion of the appeals committee is not binding without the consent of the lead investigator
Failure to adhere to these guidelines may represent a violation of University policies and consequently may be subject to judicial proceedings.
If the complaint represents a violation of the BGS Codes of Conduct and Academic Integrity, the investigation and adjudication of the complaint will be conducted in accordance with the Policies Governing Biomedical Graduate Student Conduct (9120196) on file in the Biomedical Graduate Studies Office and the Office of the Vice Dean, Research and Research Training at the School of Medicine.
If the complaint alleges research misconduct by a member of the faculty, the investigation and adjudication of the complaint will be conducted in accordance with the University's Procedures Regarding Misconduct in Research, provided in the Handbook for Faculty and Academic Administrators.
________________________________________________________________
[1] Based on ICMJE Requirements, Ann Intern Med. 1997;126:3647
[2] Based on editorial by D. Riesenberg and G. Lundberg, JAMA 1990;264:1857