Background

Several studies suggest that deviations from proper authorship practices are commonplace in medicine. The aim of this study was to explore experiences of and attitudes towards the handling of authorship in PhD theses at medical faculties in Denmark, Norway, and Sweden.

Methods

Those who defended their PhD thesis at a medical faculty in Scandinavia during the second half of 2020 were offered, by e-mail, to participate in an online survey. Survey questions dealt with experiences of violations of the first three of the ICMJE authorship criteria and misuse of authorship order in the thesis articles, as well as respondents’ attitudes to these matters. Both questions with fixed response alternatives and questions with free-text responses were used. Quantitative data were analysed statistically using the Table functions in SPSS 25 and Chi-2 tests. Free-text responses were analysed qualitatively using manifest content analysis.

Results

287 valid questionnaires were returned (response rate: 34.1%). Almost half (46.0%) of the respondents reported that the ICMJE authorship criteria were not fully respected in at least one of the papers in their thesis, while a vast majority (96.7%) found it important that authorship is handled according to the ICMJE authorship criteria. 24.4% reported inadequate handling of authorship order in at least one paper. The qualitative results provide a wide spectrum of examples of how the ICMJE authorship criteria are circumvented.

Conclusion

Despite increasing educational efforts to reduce deviations from good research practice at Scandinavian universities, the handling of authorship in medical papers remains problematic.

中文翻译：

---

斯堪的纳维亚医学博士论文中滥用共同作者身份：一项问卷调查

背景

几项研究表明，偏离正确的作者身份实践在医学中很常见。本研究的目的是探讨丹麦、挪威和瑞典医学院在处理博士论文作者身份方面的经验和态度。

方法

那些在 2020 年下半年在斯堪的纳维亚半岛的医学院进行了博士论文答辩的人将通过电子邮件获得参与在线调查的机会。调查问题涉及违反 ICMJE 作者身份标准的前三个和在论文文章中滥用作者身份顺序的经历，以及受访者对这些问题的态度。使用了具有固定回答选项的问题和具有自由文本回答的问题。使用 SPSS 25 和 Chi-2 检验中的表函数对定量数据进行统计分析。使用清单内容分析对自由文本响应进行定性分析。

结果

回收有效问卷287份（回收率34.1%）。几乎一半 (46.0%) 的受访者报告说，他们论文中至少有一篇论文没有完全遵守 ICMJE 作者身份标准，而绝大多数 (96.7%) 认为根据 ICMJE 作者身份处理作者身份很重要标准。24.4% 的人报告说至少在一篇论文中对署名顺序的处理不当。定性结果提供了如何规避 ICMJE 作者身份标准的广泛示例。

结论

尽管斯堪的纳维亚大学在减少偏离良好研究实践方面做出了越来越多的教育努力，但医学论文作者身份的处理仍然存在问题。