Rating authors' contributions to collaborative research: The PICNIC survey of university departments of pediatrics

H. Dele Davies, Joanne M. Langley, David P. Speert

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

26 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objectives: To determine how department chairs in pediatrics rate involvement in medical research and to determine whether faculty deans' offices have written criteria for evaluating research activity when assessing candidates for promotion or tenure. Design: Cross-sectional mailed survey and telephone survey. Setting: Canadian faculties of medicine. Participants: Chairs of the 16 Canadian university departments of pediatrics and deans' offices of the 16 university medical faculties. Main outcome measure: Weight assigned by department chairs to contributions to published research according to author's research role and position in list of authors and the method of listing authors. Results: Fifteen of 16 chairs responded. Twelve submitted a completed survey, two described their institutions' policies and one responded that the institution had no policy. Eleven reported that faculty members were permitted or requested to indicate research roles on curricula vitae. There was a consensus that all or principal investigators should be listed as authors and that citing the research group as collective author was insufficient. The contribution of first authors was rated highest for articles in which all or principal investigators were listed. The contribution of joint-principal investigators listed as first author was also given a high rating. In the case of collective authorship, the greatest contribution was credited to the principal investigator of the group. Participation of primary investigators in multicentre research was rated as having higher value than participation in single-centre research by seven respondents and as having equal value by four. Only one dean's office had explicit written criteria for evaluating authorship. Conclusions: Most departments of pediatrics and medical faculty deans' offices in Canadian universities have no criteria for assessing the type of contribution made to published research. In view of the trend to use multicentre settings for clinical trials, guidelines for weighting investigators' contributions are needed.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)877-882
Number of pages6
JournalCMAJ
Volume155
Issue number7
StatePublished - Oct 22 1996

Fingerprint

Pediatrics
Research Personnel
Research
Authorship
Medical Faculties
Surveys and Questionnaires
Telephone
Curriculum
Biomedical Research
Cross-Sectional Studies
Joints
Medicine
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)
Clinical Trials
Guidelines
Weights and Measures

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Rating authors' contributions to collaborative research : The PICNIC survey of university departments of pediatrics. / Davies, H. Dele; Langley, Joanne M.; Speert, David P.

In: CMAJ, Vol. 155, No. 7, 22.10.1996, p. 877-882.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{37423022429d4bfba9c59c3d936c1e6a,
title = "Rating authors' contributions to collaborative research: The PICNIC survey of university departments of pediatrics",
abstract = "Objectives: To determine how department chairs in pediatrics rate involvement in medical research and to determine whether faculty deans' offices have written criteria for evaluating research activity when assessing candidates for promotion or tenure. Design: Cross-sectional mailed survey and telephone survey. Setting: Canadian faculties of medicine. Participants: Chairs of the 16 Canadian university departments of pediatrics and deans' offices of the 16 university medical faculties. Main outcome measure: Weight assigned by department chairs to contributions to published research according to author's research role and position in list of authors and the method of listing authors. Results: Fifteen of 16 chairs responded. Twelve submitted a completed survey, two described their institutions' policies and one responded that the institution had no policy. Eleven reported that faculty members were permitted or requested to indicate research roles on curricula vitae. There was a consensus that all or principal investigators should be listed as authors and that citing the research group as collective author was insufficient. The contribution of first authors was rated highest for articles in which all or principal investigators were listed. The contribution of joint-principal investigators listed as first author was also given a high rating. In the case of collective authorship, the greatest contribution was credited to the principal investigator of the group. Participation of primary investigators in multicentre research was rated as having higher value than participation in single-centre research by seven respondents and as having equal value by four. Only one dean's office had explicit written criteria for evaluating authorship. Conclusions: Most departments of pediatrics and medical faculty deans' offices in Canadian universities have no criteria for assessing the type of contribution made to published research. In view of the trend to use multicentre settings for clinical trials, guidelines for weighting investigators' contributions are needed.",
author = "Davies, {H. Dele} and Langley, {Joanne M.} and Speert, {David P.}",
year = "1996",
month = "10",
day = "22",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "155",
pages = "877--882",
journal = "Canadian Medical Association Journal",
issn = "0008-4409",
publisher = "Canadian Medical Association",
number = "7",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Rating authors' contributions to collaborative research

T2 - The PICNIC survey of university departments of pediatrics

AU - Davies, H. Dele

AU - Langley, Joanne M.

AU - Speert, David P.

PY - 1996/10/22

Y1 - 1996/10/22

N2 - Objectives: To determine how department chairs in pediatrics rate involvement in medical research and to determine whether faculty deans' offices have written criteria for evaluating research activity when assessing candidates for promotion or tenure. Design: Cross-sectional mailed survey and telephone survey. Setting: Canadian faculties of medicine. Participants: Chairs of the 16 Canadian university departments of pediatrics and deans' offices of the 16 university medical faculties. Main outcome measure: Weight assigned by department chairs to contributions to published research according to author's research role and position in list of authors and the method of listing authors. Results: Fifteen of 16 chairs responded. Twelve submitted a completed survey, two described their institutions' policies and one responded that the institution had no policy. Eleven reported that faculty members were permitted or requested to indicate research roles on curricula vitae. There was a consensus that all or principal investigators should be listed as authors and that citing the research group as collective author was insufficient. The contribution of first authors was rated highest for articles in which all or principal investigators were listed. The contribution of joint-principal investigators listed as first author was also given a high rating. In the case of collective authorship, the greatest contribution was credited to the principal investigator of the group. Participation of primary investigators in multicentre research was rated as having higher value than participation in single-centre research by seven respondents and as having equal value by four. Only one dean's office had explicit written criteria for evaluating authorship. Conclusions: Most departments of pediatrics and medical faculty deans' offices in Canadian universities have no criteria for assessing the type of contribution made to published research. In view of the trend to use multicentre settings for clinical trials, guidelines for weighting investigators' contributions are needed.

AB - Objectives: To determine how department chairs in pediatrics rate involvement in medical research and to determine whether faculty deans' offices have written criteria for evaluating research activity when assessing candidates for promotion or tenure. Design: Cross-sectional mailed survey and telephone survey. Setting: Canadian faculties of medicine. Participants: Chairs of the 16 Canadian university departments of pediatrics and deans' offices of the 16 university medical faculties. Main outcome measure: Weight assigned by department chairs to contributions to published research according to author's research role and position in list of authors and the method of listing authors. Results: Fifteen of 16 chairs responded. Twelve submitted a completed survey, two described their institutions' policies and one responded that the institution had no policy. Eleven reported that faculty members were permitted or requested to indicate research roles on curricula vitae. There was a consensus that all or principal investigators should be listed as authors and that citing the research group as collective author was insufficient. The contribution of first authors was rated highest for articles in which all or principal investigators were listed. The contribution of joint-principal investigators listed as first author was also given a high rating. In the case of collective authorship, the greatest contribution was credited to the principal investigator of the group. Participation of primary investigators in multicentre research was rated as having higher value than participation in single-centre research by seven respondents and as having equal value by four. Only one dean's office had explicit written criteria for evaluating authorship. Conclusions: Most departments of pediatrics and medical faculty deans' offices in Canadian universities have no criteria for assessing the type of contribution made to published research. In view of the trend to use multicentre settings for clinical trials, guidelines for weighting investigators' contributions are needed.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0029839835&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0029839835&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 8837534

AN - SCOPUS:0029839835

VL - 155

SP - 877

EP - 882

JO - Canadian Medical Association Journal

JF - Canadian Medical Association Journal

SN - 0008-4409

IS - 7

ER -