LudwigKappos, Professor and Chair, Neurology, University Hospital BaselLKappos@uhbs.ch
Submitted September 01, 2016
I read with interest the retraction of 3 publications by Sato et al. in the July 12th issue of Neurology. [1-3] I was astonished to find in the text of the retraction statements a sentence by the retracting author, "that none of the coauthors participated in any misconduct and appeared as authors on an honorary basis only." [1-3] Without an editorial comment about this sentence, an impression is created that appearing "as authors on an honorary basis only" is regarded as acceptable. Maybe the editors thought that this is already clear enough and self evident for the reader. Unfortunately, honorary authorships are still part of current practice in many academic and non-academic settings and there are limited options for an editor to avoid that. This situation with Dr. Sato provides a highly didactic example that coauthorship is also coresponsibility for the integrity of the data. Ultimately a lost opportunity to reinforce author guidelines?
1. Retractions: Risedronate therapy for prevention of hip fracture after stroke in elderly women; Risedronate therapy for prevention of hip fracture after stroke in elderly women. Reply from the Authors. Neurology 2016;87:239.
2. Retraction: Risedronate and ergocalciferol prevent hip fracture in elderly men with Parkinson disease. Neurology 2016;87:239.
3. Retraction: Amelioration of osteoporosis and hypovitaminosis D by sunlight exposure in stroke patients. Neurology 2016;87:239.
For disclosures, please contact the editorial office at journal@neurology.org.
I read with interest the retraction of 3 publications by Sato et al. in the July 12th issue of Neurology. [1-3] I was astonished to find in the text of the retraction statements a sentence by the retracting author, "that none of the coauthors participated in any misconduct and appeared as authors on an honorary basis only." [1-3] Without an editorial comment about this sentence, an impression is created that appearing "as authors on an honorary basis only" is regarded as acceptable. Maybe the editors thought that this is already clear enough and self evident for the reader. Unfortunately, honorary authorships are still part of current practice in many academic and non-academic settings and there are limited options for an editor to avoid that. This situation with Dr. Sato provides a highly didactic example that coauthorship is also coresponsibility for the integrity of the data. Ultimately a lost opportunity to reinforce author guidelines?
1. Retractions: Risedronate therapy for prevention of hip fracture after stroke in elderly women; Risedronate therapy for prevention of hip fracture after stroke in elderly women. Reply from the Authors. Neurology 2016;87:239.
2. Retraction: Risedronate and ergocalciferol prevent hip fracture in elderly men with Parkinson disease. Neurology 2016;87:239.
3. Retraction: Amelioration of osteoporosis and hypovitaminosis D by sunlight exposure in stroke patients. Neurology 2016;87:239.
For disclosures, please contact the editorial office at journal@neurology.org.