文献检索文档翻译深度研究
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
邀请有礼套餐&价格历史记录

新学期,新优惠

限时优惠:9月1日-9月22日

30天高级会员仅需29元

1天体验卡首发特惠仅需5.99元

了解详情
不再提醒
插件&应用
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
高级版
套餐订阅购买积分包
AI 工具
文献检索文档翻译深度研究
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2025

作者诚信和同行评审实践:改进的挑战和机遇。

Integrity of Authorship and Peer Review Practices: Challenges and Opportunities for Improvement.

机构信息

Department of Clinical Immunology, Sanjay Gandhi Postgraduate Institute of Medical Sciences (SGPGIMS), Lucknow, India.

Centre for Rheumatology, Calicut, India.

出版信息

J Korean Med Sci. 2018 Oct 18;33(46):e287. doi: 10.3346/jkms.2018.33.e287. eCollection 2018 Nov 12.


DOI:10.3346/jkms.2018.33.e287
PMID:30416407
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6221861/
Abstract

Integrity of authorship and peer review practices are important considerations for ethical publishing. Criteria for authorship, as delineated in the guidelines by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), have undergone evolution over the decades, and now require fulfillment of four criteria, including the need to be able to take responsibility for all aspects of the manuscript in question. Although such updated authorship criteria were published nearly five years ago, still, many major medical and specialist journals have yet to revise their author instructions to conform to this. Inappropriate authorship practices may include gift, guest or ghost authorship. Existing literature suggests that such practices are still widely prevalent, especially in non-English speaking countries. Another emerging problem is that of peer review fraud, mostly by authors, but also rarely by handling editors. There is literature to suggest that a proportion of such fake peer review may be driven by the support of some unscrupulous external editing agencies. Such inappropriate practices with authorship malpractices or disagreement, or peer review fraud, have resulted in more than 600 retractions each, as identified on the retractions database of Retractionwatch.com. There is a need to generate greater awareness, especially in authors from non-English speaking regions of the world, about inappropriate authorship and unethical practices in peer review. Also, support of any external editing agency should be clearly disclosed by authors at the time of submission of a manuscript.

摘要

作者诚信和同行评审实践是道德出版的重要考虑因素。国际医学期刊编辑委员会 (ICMJE) 制定的作者标准在过去几十年中经历了演变,现在需要满足四个标准,包括能够对有关手稿的所有方面负责。尽管这些更新的作者标准近五年前就已发布,但许多主要的医学和专业期刊仍未修改其作者说明以符合这些标准。不适当的作者行为可能包括赠品、客座或幽灵作者。现有文献表明,这种做法仍然普遍存在,尤其是在非英语国家。另一个新出现的问题是同行评审欺诈,主要是作者,但也很少由处理编辑进行。有文献表明,这种假同行评审的一部分可能是由一些无良外部编辑机构的支持所驱动的。在 Retractionwatch.com 的撤回数据库中,已经识别出由于作者署名不当行为或意见不合或同行评审欺诈而导致的超过 600 次撤回。需要提高认识,特别是在来自世界非英语地区的作者中,提高对同行评审中的不当作者行为和不道德行为的认识。此外,作者在提交稿件时应明确披露对任何外部编辑机构的支持。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/41b0/6221861/4e69530c66bd/jkms-33-e287-g007.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/41b0/6221861/6f97816d67fa/jkms-33-e287-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/41b0/6221861/a42bd6237754/jkms-33-e287-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/41b0/6221861/ac55dd47cfc1/jkms-33-e287-g003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/41b0/6221861/d2515787c674/jkms-33-e287-g004.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/41b0/6221861/5604865b418f/jkms-33-e287-g005.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/41b0/6221861/ba6e18d6379b/jkms-33-e287-g006.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/41b0/6221861/4e69530c66bd/jkms-33-e287-g007.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/41b0/6221861/6f97816d67fa/jkms-33-e287-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/41b0/6221861/a42bd6237754/jkms-33-e287-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/41b0/6221861/ac55dd47cfc1/jkms-33-e287-g003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/41b0/6221861/d2515787c674/jkms-33-e287-g004.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/41b0/6221861/5604865b418f/jkms-33-e287-g005.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/41b0/6221861/ba6e18d6379b/jkms-33-e287-g006.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/41b0/6221861/4e69530c66bd/jkms-33-e287-g007.jpg

相似文献

[1]
Integrity of Authorship and Peer Review Practices: Challenges and Opportunities for Improvement.

J Korean Med Sci. 2018-10-18

[2]
Ensuring integrity in biomedical publication.

JAMA. 1987-12-18

[3]
Meeting our ethical obligations in medical publishing: responsibilities of editors, authors, and readers of peer-reviewed journals.

Arch Ophthalmol. 2005-5

[4]
Statement on Publication Ethics for Editors and Publishers.

J Korean Med Sci. 2016-9

[5]
Ghost- and guest-authored pharmaceutical industry-sponsored studies: abuse of academic integrity, the peer review system, and public trust.

Ann Pharmacother. 2013-6-26

[6]
Honorary and ghost authorship in nursing publications.

J Nurs Scholarsh. 2014-6-13

[7]
[Author and authorship in medical journals].

Neurologia. 2009

[8]
Why do you think you should be the author on this manuscript? Analysis of open-ended responses of authors in a general medical journal.

BMC Med Res Methodol. 2012-12-20

[9]
Prevalence of articles with honorary authors and ghost authors in peer-reviewed medical journals.

JAMA. 1998-7-15

[10]
Ethical dilemmas in scientific publication: pitfalls and solutions for editors.

Rev Saude Publica. 2006-8

引用本文的文献

[1]
Leveraging artificial intelligence in the peer review of neurosurgical research articles.

Neurosurg Rev. 2025-9-3

[2]
Establishing a policy statement on the use of artificial intelligence in neurosurgery.

Neurosurg Rev. 2025-8-19

[3]
Ten simple rules for successfully carrying out funded research projects.

PLoS Comput Biol. 2024-9-19

[4]
Breaking barriers: Navigating the path to successful scientific research publication among faculty members in Egypt.

SAGE Open Med. 2024-9-17

[5]
Coercion Authorship: Ubiquitous and Preventable.

J Korean Med Sci. 2024-8-5

[6]
[Authorship and Inappropriate Authorship from an Ethical Publication Perspective].

J Korean Soc Radiol. 2022-7

[7]
Threats to scholarly research integrity arising from paper mills: a rapid scoping review.

Clin Rheumatol. 2022-7

[8]
Writing for "International Orthopaedics": authorship, fraud, and ethical concerns.

Int Orthop. 2021-10

[9]
A Survey-Weighted Analytic Hierarchy Process to Quantify Authorship.

Adv Med Educ Pract. 2021-9-15

[10]
Retractions, Fake Peer Reviews, and Paper Mills.

J Korean Med Sci. 2021-6-21

本文引用的文献

[1]
Updated Editorial Guidance for Quality and Reliability of Research Output.

J Korean Med Sci. 2018-8-16

[2]
Misconduct as the main cause for retraction. A descriptive study of retracted publications and their authors.

Gac Sanit. 2019

[3]
The Malversations of Authorship - Current Status in Academic Community and How to Prevent It.

Acta Inform Med. 2018

[4]
Authorship grids: Practical tools to facilitate collaboration and ethical publication.

Res Nurs Health. 2018-4

[5]
Inappropriate Authorship and Kinship in Research Evaluation.

J Korean Med Sci. 2018-3-26

[6]
Authorship and contribution disclosures.

Sci Adv. 2017-11-8

[7]
Preprint servers facilitate scientific discourse.

Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2017-11-28

[8]
Researcher and Author Profiles: Opportunities, Advantages, and Limitations.

J Korean Med Sci. 2017-11

[9]
A Method for Improving the Integrity of Peer Review.

Sci Eng Ethics. 2017-8-15

[10]
Fake peer review - too good to be true.

Postgrad Med J. 2017-8

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

推荐工具

医学文档翻译智能文献检索