Academic researchers often clamor to be authors on scientific papers in which they played even the most modest of research roles, as their publication records help boost their academic standing. But in industry — where commercialization, rather than tenure, often takes precedent — the situation is different. Scientists working for drug companies often try to hide their involvement in publications to disconnect the research from their employer — a practice that is currently allowed under the current guidance for authorship put out by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) owing to an ambiguity in authorship requirements.
In a perspective published online today in PLoS Medicine, Alastair Matheson argues that the ICMJE should close this loophole and force industry scientists to adequately publicize their involvement in research.
The practice of hiding a publication’s true authors “gives industry a bad reputation and perpetuates the notion that industry can’t be trusted,” says Matheson, an independent consultant in London and Toronto who once earned a living ghostwriting papers for pharmaceutical companies. “They’re so scared of sticking their heads above the parapet that they’re shooting themselves in the foot.”
The ICMJE currently has three requirements for authorship: involvement in the scientific research, writing the article, and approving the final manuscript. A researcher must fulfill all three requirements to be listed as an author on the paper.
“The sticking point is this final approval thing,” says Bart Moffatt, a philosopher of biology at Mississippi State University who was not involved in the perspective. It allows industry scientists to take part in all elements of a study, yet keep their name buried in the small print of acknowledgment section — as long as they never looked at the final manuscript.
Rather than putting forward the names of the most actively involved scientists, drug companies often let academic researchers take the lead on industry-sponsored studies. “It’s marketing magic if you can have someone well-respected, trusted and seemingly independent author your paper,” says Moffatt. Industry scientists “could just publish this work being upfront about their conflict,” he adds, “but they’d lose that marketing push.”
In place of ICMJE’s three requirement system, Matheson argues that the ICMJE should list critical roles, including research execution and manuscript writing, and then mandate that anyone who participates in any those roles must be listed as an author. He concedes that such rules aren’t foolproof — “there is always going to be dishonesty” — but regularly updating the rules as problems arise could reduce the impact of these loopholes, he says.
Image: Wikimedia
