Authorship and Contributorship Criteria and Practices at the Annals of African Surgery
Abstract
Cecilia Munguti,1 James Kiilu,1 James Kigera,1 Michael Mwachiro1
Objective
The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) authorship criteria ensure appropriate credit for significant research contributions, while the Contributor Role Taxonomy (CRediT) framework offers a detailed account of individual scholarly contributions. Despite these frameworks, honorary authorship remains widespread in health sciences,1 and surveys from Africa have documented its prevalence and the difficulty of applying authorship standards.2 This study evaluated the fulfillment of ICMJE authorship criteria and CRediT contributions in manuscripts submitted between 2017 and 2023.
Design
This retrospective study analyzed the fulfillment of ICMJE authorship criteria and author-reported CRediT contributor roles for manuscripts submitted to Annals of African Surgery, a journal that endorses the ICMJE authorship criteria, between 2017 and 2023. The evaluated ICMJE criteria included criteria 1 (intellectual input) and 2 (manuscript drafting or critical revision) because these are the only author-level items captured as discrete checkboxes in the submission system. Criteria 3 and 4 were not assessed because they are captured as a collective attestation in a signed mandatory licence agreement required at submission. Data were retrieved from the journal’s online manuscript management system. CRediT roles were scored using a weighted system: 3 points for lead, 2 for equal, and 1 for supporting contributions across 14 roles, with a maximum possible score of 42 converted to a percentage. Descriptive statistics summarized ICMJE compliance and CRediT role distribution.
Results
A total of 1619 authors and 448 manuscripts with complete authorship data were evaluated. Among the authors, 1027 (63.4%) met both ICMJE criteria 1 and 2, 460 (28.4%) met only 1 criterion, and 132 (8.2%) met none. Of the 1619 authors, 709 (43.8%) were supervisors; among these supervisor authors, 523 (73.8%) met both criteria, 124 (17.5%) met only 1 criterion, and 62 (8.7%) failed to meet any. A total of 9610 CRediT contributor roles were analyzed. On weighted CRediT scores, 275 (17%) authors had a contribution score above 50%, while 971 (60%) scored 25% or less. Among 709 supervisors, 241 (34%) had scores above 50% and 269 (38%) scored 25% or less. Funding acquisition was credited to 296 authors (18.3%). Among the supervisor authors, 248 (35.0%) reported funding acquisition, accounting for 83.8% of all authors who claimed that role.
Conclusions
Using ICMJE criteria, supervisor involvement appeared to be limited, suggesting a high prevalence of guest authorship. However, weighted CRediT scores indicated that supervisors often contributed significantly, more so than other coauthors, highlighting a disconnect between traditional authorship criteria and actual contributions. Although limited to 1 journal, this study demonstrates the value of integrating authorship criteria audits with CRediT data, while noting the potential for checkbox behavior by submitting authors who may not grasp the significance of their declarations.
References
1. Meursinge Reynders RA, ter Riet G, Di Girolamo N, Cavagnetto D, Malički M. Honorary authorship is highly prevalent in health sciences: systematic review and meta-analysis of surveys. Sci Rep. 2024;14:4385. doi:10.1038/s41598-024-31526-2
2. Breet E, Botha J, Horn L, Swartz L. Academic and scientific authorship practices: a survey among South African researchers. J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2018;13(5):412-420. doi:10.1177/1556264618789253
1Annals of African Surgery, Nairobi, Kenya, ceciliamunguti@annalsofafricansurgery.com.Conflict of Interest Disclosures
James Kigera is a member of the Peer Review Congress Advisory Board but was not involved in the review or decision for this abstract. No other disclosures were reported.
Additional Information
James Kiilu is a co–corresponding author (jameskiilu@annalsofafricansurgery.com).