The author who wasn’t there? Fairness and attribution in publications following access to population biobanks

We conducted a document analysis that explored publication ethics and authorship in the context of population biobanks from both a theoretical (e.g. normative documents) and practical (e.g. biobank-specific documentation) perspective. The aim was to provide an overview of the state of authorship attribution in population biobanks and attempt to fill the gap in discussions around the issue. Our findings demonstrate that the most common approach adopted in both the normative and biobank-specific documentation is acknowledgment. A co-authorship approach was second and highlighted concerns surrounding the fairness of imposing authorship of the scientific leadership as a condition to access data and biosamples, as well as the alignment with the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors’ criteria such as what is deemed a significant contribution and how to ensure accountability. Based on these findings, we propose a three-prong approach, that may be cumulative, to address the issue of authorship attribution in the context of population biobanks, namely 1) the biobank should be appropriately acknowledged; 2) an invitation for co-authorship should be made based on the spirit of collaboration and provided a substantial contribution has been made; and 3) a citation/referencing option should be available.

本研究开展文献分析，从理论（如规范性文件）与实践（如生物样本库专属文档）双重视角，探讨了人群生物样本库（population biobanks）场景下的出版伦理与作者署名问题。本研究旨在系统梳理人群生物样本库中作者署名归属的现状，并尝试填补该议题相关讨论的空白。研究结果表明，在规范性文件及生物样本库专属文档中，最普遍采用的作者署名归属方式为致谢（acknowledgment）；位居其次的是共同作者署名方式，该方式凸显了多项争议：诸如将承担科研主导职责作为获取数据与生物样本的条件，其公平性存疑，同时该方式与国际医学期刊编辑委员会（International Committee of Medical Journal Editors）的相关准则存在适配性问题，例如如何界定实质性贡献，以及如何确保责任落实。基于上述研究结果，本研究提出一套可叠加使用的三管齐下方案，以应对人群生物样本库场景下的作者署名归属问题，具体如下：1） 对生物样本库予以恰当致谢；2） 基于协作精神，在研究人员作出实质性贡献后，可邀请其作为共同作者；3） 提供引用/参考文献选项。