Analysis of Authorship Criteria in Articles Published in the Revista Argentina de Cardiología

Abstract

The increasing number of authors per article might be due, to a certain extent, to less strict criteria for authorship. The goal of this study was to know the authorship criteria used to be included as authors of the articles published. A survey was administered to the authors who have published articles in the Rev Argent Cardiol during 2010. The authors were asked to indicate the authorship criteria used. The information was analyzed comparing the criteria used by the authors with those recommended by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). A total of 214 authors were surveyed. According to the ICMJE criteria, 26.6% qualified as “justified authorship”, 40.7% as “partial authorship” and 32.7% as “unjustified authorship”. The average number of authors per article was 7.1±2.60; if only justified authorship was considered, this number might fall to 1.9±1.16, increasing to 4.8±2.55 (p <0.0001) when partial authorship was included. In conclusion, in the Rev Argent Cardiol unjustified authorship rather than contribution of multiple investigators might explain the increasing number of authors per article in the last years. Even when the criteria of partial authorship were applied, only 67% of authors could justify their authorship. Authors, editors and readers should adopt a more critical attitude towards authorship credit based on strict rules; in addition, the role of contributors should be better appreciated.