Skip to main content
Log in

Authorship patterns in life sciences, preclinical basic and clinical research papers

  • Published:
Scientometrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The present paper examines the multiple authorship in research papers in biomedical sciences from the more basic aspects to clinically oriented research. Seventeen journals were chosen for analysis — nine from the general and life sciences categories and eight from medical sciences group with clinical orientation. All these were “high impact” journals as per the Science Citation Index and come in the top ten journals in their respective desciplines. The average authors/paper was significantly higher (P<0.001) in medical journals −4.299 (range 3.21–5.35) as compared to general biomedical journals −3.298 (range 3.21–5.35). Data from highly cited papers (1961–78) also indicate that papers in clinical sciences have higher average authors (2.71) as compared to preclinical basic research (2.25: P<0.26) and more basic research areas like biochemistry and molecular biology (2.208; P<0.02). The team size in research in clinical subjects is therefore appreciably larger as compared to basic biomedical sciences. Also the general and biomedical sciences articles were relatively longer (average 7.75 pages; range 2.69–10.07) as compared to medical papers with a clinical orientation (avarage 4.24 pages; range 1.80–12.92; P<0.001).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. D. DE SOLLA PRICE,Little Science, Big Science, New York, Columbia University Press, 1963, pp. 87–89.

    Google Scholar 

  2. D. DE B. BEAVER, R. ROSEN, Studies on scientific collaboration, Part III. Professionalization and natural history of modern scientific co-authorship,Scientometrics, 3 (1979) 231.

    Google Scholar 

  3. A. G. HEFFNER, Funded research, multiple authorship and subauthorship collaboration in four desciplines,Scientometrics, 3 (1981) 5.

    Google Scholar 

  4. K. SUBRAHMANYAM, E. M. STEPHENS, Research collaboration and funding in biochemistry and chemical engineering,International Forum on Information and Documentation, 7 (1982) 26.

    Google Scholar 

  5. D. W. KING, D. D. McDONALD, N. K. RODERER,The Journal in scientific Communication: The Role of Authors, Publishers, Librarians and Readers in a Vital System, Rockville, Maryland, King Research, 1979.

  6. K. D. BURMAN, Hanging from masthead — reflections on authorship,Annals of Internal Medicine, 97 (1982) 602.

    Google Scholar 

  7. K. SATYANARAYANA, Whose name and how many names should be on a scientific paper,Tropical Gastroenterol, 7 (1986) 88.

    Google Scholar 

  8. B. STEPHANIK, Individual and multiple authorship of papers in chemistry and physics,Scientometrics 4 (1982) 331.

    Google Scholar 

  9. M. D. GORDON, A critical assessment of inferred relations between multiple authorship, scientific collaboration, the production of papers and their acceptance for publication,Scientometrics, 3 (1981) 5.

    Google Scholar 

  10. R. S. ALEXANDER, Trends in authorship,Circulation Research, 1 (1953) 281.

    Google Scholar 

  11. B. L. CLARKE, Multiauthorship trends in scientific papers,Science, 143 (1964) 822.

    Google Scholar 

  12. D. DE B. BEAVER, Collaboration and team work in physics,Czechoslovak Journal of Physics, B36 (1986) 14.

    Google Scholar 

  13. H. DARDIK, Multiple authorship,Surgely Gynecology and Obstetrics, 145 (1977) 418.

    Google Scholar 

  14. S. M. LAWANI, Some bibliometric correlates of quality in scientific research,Scientometrics, 9 (1986) 13.

    Google Scholar 

  15. K. SATYANARAYANA, Excessive publication in medical sciences in India,The National Medical Journal of India, 2 (1989) (in press).

  16. E. GARFIELD, Most cited articles of the 1960's Part 2. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology; Part 3. Preclinical Basic Research; and Part 4: Clinical Research,Current Contents, August 27, 1979; February 4, 1980; February 11, 1980.

  17. International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. Guidelines on authorship.British Medical Journal, 291 (1985) 722.

    Google Scholar 

  18. E. J. HUTH, Guidelines on authorship of medical papers.Annals of Internal Medicine, 104 (1986) 269.

    Google Scholar 

  19. P. WOLF,Deception in scientific research: Scope of the problem, Paper presented at the AAMS—ABA National Conference of Lawyers and Scientists Workshop on Scientific Fraud and Misconduct. The Woods, Hedges Ville, West Virginia, 18–20 September 1987, p. 1–59.

  20. I. ANDERSON, Never mind the quality,New Scientist, 106 (1985) 54 (April 18, 1985).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Satyanarayana, K., Ratnakar, K.V. Authorship patterns in life sciences, preclinical basic and clinical research papers. Scientometrics 17, 363–371 (1989). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02026418

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02026418

Keywords

Navigation