Authorship

BMJ

Volumn 314, Issue 7086, 1997, Pages 1046-

  Barker, Andrew ^a   Powell, Richard A ^b   Bhopal, R S ^c   Rankin, J M ^c   Mccoll, E ^d   Thomas, L H ^d   Stacy, R ^c   Pearson, P H ^c   Kaner, E F S ^c   Vernon, B G ^c   Rodgers, H ^e  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHAMPTON   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF EXETER   (United Kingdom)

^c Department of Epidemiology and Public Health ^*  (United Kingdom)

^d Centre for Health Services Research   (United Kingdom)

^e NEWCASTLE UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85008286257     PISSN: 09598138     EISSN: 14685833     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/bmj.314.7086.1046     Document Type: Letter

References (10)

1. Smith R. Time to face up to research misconduct. BMJ 1996; 312: 789–90.
2. Horton R. Time to redefine authorship. BMJ 1996; 312: 723.
3. Hogg RJ. Trials and tribulations of multi-centre studies: lessons learned from the experiences of the Southwest Pediatric Nephrology Study Group. Pediatr Nephrol 1991; 5: 348–51.
4. Kassirer JP, Angell M. On authorship and acknowledgements. N Engl J Med 1991; 325: 1510–1512.
5. Hanson SMH. Collaborative research and authorship credit:beginning guidelines. Nurs Res 1988; 37: 49–52.
6. Riesenberg D, Lundberg G. The order of authorship: who's on first. JAMA 1990; 264: 1857.
7. Day RA. How to write and publish a scientific paper. 4th ed. Phoenix, AZ: Oryx, 1994.
8. Burman KD. Hanging from the masthead. Ann Intern Med 1982; 97: 602–605.
9. Huth EJ. How to write and publish papers in the medical sciences. 2nd ed. Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins, 1990.
10. Bhopal RS, Rankin M, McColl E, Thomas LH, Kaner EFS, Stacy R, et al. The vexed question of authorship: views of researchers in a British medical faculty. BMJ 1997; 314: 1009–12. (5 April.)