Who is innocent in authorship misconduct?

May 2016

Article Contents

Article Navigation > Zoological Research > 2016 > 37(3): 117-118

Su-qing LIU. Who is innocent in authorship misconduct?. Zoological Research, 2016, 37(3): 117-118.

Citation:

Su-qing LIU. Who is innocent in authorship misconduct?. Zoological Research, 2016, 37(3): 117-118.

Su-qing LIU. Who is innocent in authorship misconduct?. Zoological Research, 2016, 37(3): 117-118.

Citation:

Su-qing LIU. Who is innocent in authorship misconduct?. Zoological Research, 2016, 37(3): 117-118.

[1]	Du J, Tang XL. 2013. Perceptions of author order versus contribution among researchers with different professional ranks and the potential of harmonic counts for encouraging ethical co-authorship practices. Scientometrics, 96(1):277-295.
[2]	International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. 2013(2013-08-01)[2016-05-13]. Defining the Role of Authors and Contributors. http://www.icmje.org.
[3]	Kornhaber RA, McLean LM, Baber RJ. 2015. Ongoing ethical issues concerning authorship in biomedical journals:and integrative review. International Journal of Nanomedicine, 10:4837-4846.
[4]	Kressel HY, Dixon AK. 2011. Where is the honor in honorary authorship?. Radiology, 259(2):324-327.
[5]	Retractionwatch. 2016[2016-05-10]. BioMed Central retracting 43 papers for fake peer review. http://retractionwatch.com.
[6]	Stretton S. 2014. Systematic review on the primary and secondary reporting of the prevalence of ghostwriting in the medical literature. BMJ Open, 4(7):e004777.
[7]	Vinther S, Rosenberg J. 2012. Appearance of ghost and gift authors in Ugeskrift for Laeger and Danish Medical Journal. Danish Medical Journal, 59(5):A4455.
[8]	Wislar JS, Flanagin A, Fontanarosa PB, DeAngelis CD. 2011. Honorary and ghost authorship in high impact biomedical journals:a cross sectional survey. BMJ, 343:d6128.