AUTHORSHIP POLICIES IN US MEDICAL SCHOOLS:
REPORT OF A SURVEY
Anne Hudson Jones
Institute for the Medical Humanities, The University of Texas Medical Branch, 301 University Blvd, Galveston, TX 77555-1311, USA
Objective: To determine how many US medical schools
a) have adopted an authorship policy; b) are now in the process of developing an authorship policy; or c) are not planning to develop
an authorship policy, and why.
Design: A letter and an anonymous questionnaire were mailed to the deans of the 125 US medical schools identified by the Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC).
Results: Questionnaires have been returned from 119 medical schools (95%). Twenty-five (21%) have adopted an authorship policy; 11(9%) are in the process of developing a
policy; 77 (65%) do not have a policy and are not developing one. Six respondents did not know whether their schools had discussed developing a policy (5%). Among the reasons given
for not developing an authorship policy were that a policy is not needed (25%); that a policy can be established only at the departmental level because of differing disciplinary
traditions (3%); and that the faculty could not agree on a policy (3%).
Conclusions: Editors of biomedical journals have led the way in developing specific criteria for responsible authorship. But the rewards for authorship (salary increases, promotion, tenure)
are usually conferred by institutions, and these same institutions must mediate disputes about authorship and allegations of scientific misconduct. Thus, it is encouraging that US medical schools
have begun to address issues of authorship and to establish guidelines for their faculties. The experiences of medical schools that have developed authorship policies may be of considerable benefit to schools that have not.
Return to Session Information
