Daskalopoulou Stella S, Mikhailidis Dimitri P
Curr Med Res Opin. 2005 Feb;21(2):307-10. doi: 10.1185/030079905X28944.
In this editorial, we comment on the European Medical Writers Association (EMWA) guidelines and the accompanying Delphi study published in this issue of Current Medical Research and Opinion. These articles deal with 'ghost writing' and the role of professional writers. We propose that the interaction between professional writers and authors is defined along the following principles: Guarantee: are the authors guarantors of the article? Advice: was the professional writer 'advised' by the author(s) before, as well as after, starting the assignment? Were the overall conclusions defined by the author(s)? Transparency: the contribution of professional writers should be acknowledged (we provide a draft statement). Expertise: does the professional writer have sufficient knowledge in the relevant specific field? The initials of these headings form the word ' GATE '. Therefore, we called them the ' GATE principles '. We also discuss suggestions for the accreditation of professional writers in specific fields. Professional writers play a useful role but this has to be clearly defined so as to achieve high ethical and scientific standards.
在这篇社论中，我们对欧洲医学撰写者协会（EMWA）的指南以及本期《当代医学研究与观点》上发表的配套德尔菲研究进行评论。这些文章探讨了“代笔”以及专业撰写者的角色。我们建议专业撰写者与作者之间的互动应遵循以下原则来界定：保证：作者是文章的担保人吗？建议：在开始任务之前以及之后，专业撰写者是否得到作者的“建议”？文章的总体结论是由作者确定的吗？透明度：应承认专业撰写者的贡献（我们提供了一份声明草案）。专业知识：专业撰写者在相关特定领域是否具备足够的知识？这些标题的首字母组成了“GATE”这个词。因此，我们将它们称为“GATE原则”。我们还讨论了特定领域专业撰写者认证的相关建议。专业撰写者发挥着有益的作用，但必须明确界定这一作用，以达到高道德和科学标准。
