Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

For debate . . . Individual contributions to multiauthor papers.

S D Moulopoulos, D A Sideris, K A Georgilis

    British Medical Journal (Clinical Research Ed.)
    |November 26, 1983
    PubMed
    Summary
    This summary is machine-generated.

    Related Concept Videos

    You might also read

    Related Articles

    Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

    Sort by
    Same author

    Training in modern medicine: Should objectives be modified?

    European journal of internal medicine·2005
    Same author

    Heart rate variability and the autonomic nervous system.

    European journal of internal medicine·2005
    Same author

    Treatment of acute lower limb ischemia following the use of the Duett sealing device: report of three cases and review of the literature.

    Cardiovascular and interventional radiology·2004
    Same author

    Effects of delayed (24 h postintervention) beta-irradiation therapy after coronary angioplasty and stenting in de novo native coronary artery lesions; Results of a randomized clinical and intravascular ultrasound study.

    Cardiovascular radiation medicine·2004
    Same author

    Haemodynamic and catecholamine response to simulated ventricular tachycardia in man: effect of baseline left ventricular function.

    Heart (British Cardiac Society)·2003
    Same author

    External beam irradiation in angioplasted arteries of hypercholesterolemic rabbits. The dose and time effect.

    Cardiovascular radiation medicine·2002

    This study analyzed coauthored research papers to assess academic contributions. Findings suggest current methods may not accurately reflect individual impact, highlighting the need for clearer author contribution statements.

    Area of Science:

    • Bibliometrics
    • Scholarly Communication
    • Research Evaluation

    Background:

    • Assessing individual contributions in collaborative research is complex.
    • Traditional metrics may not accurately reflect a scholar's true impact.
    • Evaluating candidates for academic positions requires nuanced assessment of research output.

    Purpose of the Study:

    • To estimate the actual contribution of four candidates to their coauthored papers.
    • To compare different methods of quantifying research impact based on authorship.
    • To propose improvements for reporting author contributions in scientific publications.

    Main Methods:

    • Analysis of 879 research papers from four academic candidates.
    • Examination of author count, name order, and publication year.

    Related Experiment Videos

  • Application of two statistical methods to estimate individual contributions based on author position.

    • Main Results:

    • Assuming equal contribution did not alter candidate rankings.
    • Statistical methods adjusting for author position yielded different paper counts (e.g., 84, 95, 26, 33 and 88, 94, 28, 31).
    • The importance of the last author's contribution may be underestimated by current models.

    Conclusions:

    • Current methods for evaluating coauthored publications may be insufficient.
    • A more accurate assessment of individual research contributions is needed.
    • Journals should consider requiring authors to specify their roles (e.g., idea, data collection, writing).