{"id":46841,"date":"2018-06-20T11:51:53","date_gmt":"2018-06-20T11:51:53","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/raed.academy\/?p=46841"},"modified":"2018-09-04T08:36:52","modified_gmt":"2018-09-04T08:36:52","slug":"authorship-of-scientific-publications","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/raed.academy\/en\/authorship-of-scientific-publications\/","title":{"rendered":"Legitimate authors and devalued signatures"},"content":{"rendered":"

Marta Pulido, a doctor of medicine and surgeon, has joined our academy with an acceptance speech entitled Reflexiones sobre la autor\u00eda de las publicaciones cient\u00edficas (\u201cReflections on the authorship of scientific publications\u201d)<\/h2>\n
\"Acto

Dr Marta Pulido<\/p><\/div>\n

Marta Pulido<\/strong>, a doctor of medicine and surgeon, was formally accepted as a corresponding member of the Royal European Academy of Doctors – Barcelona 1914<\/strong> (RAED) at a ceremony held on Wednesday 20 June in the Atlantes Room of the Royal Circle Artistic of Barcelona<\/strong><\/a>. The member elect delivered her acceptance speech entitled Reflexiones sobre la autor\u00eda de las publicaciones cient\u00edficas<\/strong> (\u201cReflections on the authorship of scientific publications\u201d). Pedro Clar\u00f3s<\/strong><\/a>, a full member of the RAED and the vice-president of its governing board, responded on behalf of the academy.<\/p>\n

\u201c<\/span>The transformation of a scientific study into a text suitable for publication in a biomedical journal is indeed a complex process, and one highly likely to overwhelm and discourage newcomers<\/h2>\n

Dr Pulido’s work is concerned with the complex issue of authorship in scientific publications, particularly those affected by the now-obligatory procedure of peer review taken from the English-speaking world. \u201cThe transformation of a scientific study into a text suitable for publication in a biomedical journal is indeed a complex process, and one highly likely to overwhelm and discourage newcomers. The hurdles that have to be jumped during the drafting of the article can be just as daunting as those that arose during the original study\u201d, says the researcher.<\/p>\n

The new academician dates today\u2019s standardised revision of scientific work to just after the Second World War, when the system of peer review became generalised, before gradually consolidating and then acquiring its current strong base. Another decisive moment in this process of standardisation, which the author likewise refers to, is the publication in 1985 of the first book dedicated to peer review as a concept.<\/p>\n

The problem, she continues, is the conduct of many \u201creviewers\u201d when it comes to attaching their signatures to scientific studies with which they have absolutely no connection, particularly when they consist of work by junior researchers. Hard-working young postgraduates may be treated unethically, by not being given legitimate credit for, or recognition of, their efforts. This predatory desire to accumulate by-lines can lead to a slippery slope of misconduct, where authorship is debased by unjustified and devalued signatures\u201d, she points out.<\/p>\n

Dr Pulido concluded with a satirical ode on this problem, originally published in The Lancet<\/strong>:<\/p>\n

“When the first eraser was not finished yet
\nAspiring authors were already aligned
\nThey maneuvered to take positions
\nWho would be the first, second and third
\nAnd who “and cols.” In subsequent citations
\nIf the food of the academics is to publish
\nNot to appear among the first authors is to agonize…
\nBut the young people who worked had not slept
\nThey were thanked or fell into oblivion
\nWhen the article was being reviewed
\nSix co-authors did not even know about it…”<\/p>\n

Admission speech<\/a><\/h3>\n

Gallery<\/h3>\n\n\t\t