A Guide to Authorship in Clinical Research Publications

What you will learn

Six things you will be able to do after reading this guide.

Know who qualifies as an author
The four cumulative ICMJE conditions, and how contributorship and CRediT make roles transparent.
Recognise unethical authorship
Ghost, honorary and coercive authorship, salami slicing and the lessons of the Slutsky and Darsee cases.
Use the Red Flag Checklist
Nine areas of risk, from data and results misconduct to paper mills and peer review manipulation.
Prevent disputes before they start
Discuss early, document contributions, agree formally, review regularly and acknowledge non-authors.
Handle AI tools responsibly
Why LLMs cannot be authors, and what journals now expect you to disclose.
Navigate industry-sponsored research
GPP 2022, medical writing disclosure and the legal and contractual side of authorship.

How well do you know the rules of authorship?

Three quick questions taken from the guide. Test what you already know.

0of 3 correct so far

Question 1 of 3

In one study of peer-reviewed medical journals, what share of articles had at least one honorary author?

About 19%, and 11% had ghost authors. The guide explains how these practices arise and how to avoid them.

You scored 0 out of 3

The guide covers each of these in depth, with a checklist you can use from the start of every project.

Download the free guide

Look inside

A few of the 16 pages, so you know exactly what you are getting.

Sample page: Key insights — **Key insights**Two checklists to get you started

Sample page: Authorship red flag checklist — **Authorship red flag checklist**Nine areas, 34 warning signs

Sample page: Acceptable authorship criteria — **Acceptable authorship criteria**The four ICMJE conditions

Sample page: Prolific authors — **Prolific authors**What the data show

Sample page: An interview with our House Editor — **An interview with our House Editor**Agreements, disputes and the future

“In modern science, the pursuit of truth is admirable, but the pursuit of authorship is irresistible, for nothing so enhances a discovery as one’s name elegantly attached to it.”

Dr Tim Hardman, Managing Director, Niche Science & Technology

Frequently asked questions

What qualifies someone to be an author on a scientific publication?

Authorship requires substantial intellectual contribution, not just involvement. According to the ICMJE criteria cited in the document, authors must contribute meaningfully to the study design, data acquisition or interpretation, participate in drafting or revising the manuscript, approve the final version, and accept accountability for the integrity of the work. The guide emphasises that many listed authors in modern research still fail to meet these standards.

What are the most common forms of unethical authorship?

The top recurring problems include:

Honorary (gift) authorship — crediting individuals who did not contribute.
Ghost authorship — omitting contributors such as medical writers.
Salami slicing — splitting one dataset into multiple minimal papers.
Hyper‑prolific authorship — implausibly high publication rates without meaningful involvement.
Paper mill involvement — purchasing fabricated manuscripts or authorship slots. These practices undermine transparency and distort academic credit.

How can research teams prevent authorship disputes?

We identify early, proactive planning:

Agree authorship order at project initiation.
Document expected contributions and revisit them regularly.
Use formal authorship agreements, especially in multi‑centre or industry‑funded studies.
Adopt contributorship frameworks like CRediT to clarify roles.
Clear communication and documentation are the strongest safeguards.

How should AI tools like ChatGPT be used in scientific writing?

The document is explicit: LLMs cannot be authors because they lack accountability, intent, and consent. Their use must be transparently disclosed, including what aspects of drafting or analysis they assisted with. Risks include factual inaccuracies, bias, and fabricated references (“AI hallucinations”). Journals increasingly require AI‑use statements and are deploying AI tools to detect image manipulation and paper‑mill activity.

What special considerations apply to authorship in industry‑sponsored research?

Industry publications must follow GPP 2022 and emphasise transparency. This includes:

Disclosing sponsor involvement.
Acknowledging medical writing support and funding sources.
Ensuring authorship reflects genuine intellectual contribution, not commercial influence.
Aligning contractual obligations with ethical authorship standards. We note that industry settings are particularly vulnerable to ghost authorship and sponsor‑controlled narratives if not carefully managed.