help button home button JAMIA Hate scrolling?
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
First published October 26, 2006 as JAMIA PrePrint; doi:10.1197/jamia.M2212
Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association 2007;14(1):16-18
© 2007 American Medical Informatics Association

A more recent version of this article appeared on January 1, 2007
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
M2212v1
14/1/16    most recent
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Welker, J. A.
Right arrow Articles by McCue, J. D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Welker, J. A.
Right arrow Articles by McCue, J. D.

Submitted on July 14, 2006
Accepted on October 13, 2006

Authorship Versus "Credit" for Participation in Research: A Case Study of Potential Ethical Dilemmas Created by Technical Tools used by Researchers and Claims for Authorship by their Creators

James A. Welker DO1* and Jack D. McCue MD2

Affiliation of the authors: 1 University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD; Franklin Square Clinical Research Center, Franklin Square Hospital Center, Baltimore, MD ; 2 University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD; Franklin Square Hospital Center, Baltimore, MD

* To whom correspondence should be addressed.

The distinction between authorship and other forms of credit for contribution to a publication has been a persisting controversy that has resulted in numerous guidelines outlining the expected contributions of those claiming authorship. While there have been flagrant, well-publicized deviations from widely-accepted standards, they are largely outnumbered by cases that are not publicity-worthy, and therefore remain known to only those directly involved with the inappropriate conduct. We discuss the definition and ethical requirements of authorship, offer a case example of the authorship debate created by a technical tool at our institution, and review parallels that support and dispute the authorship claims of our software developers. Ultimately, we conclude that development of a technical tool that enables data collection does not adequately substitute for contributions to study design and manuscript preparation, the designers of the technical tool would not have an adequate understanding of the publication to defend it publicly and therefore cannot be listed as authors.






HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
Copyright © 1994 by the American Medical Informatics Association.