Are critical care authors publication dealers?

  • Peter Buhl Hjortrup
  • Chiara Robba
  • Emmanuel Weiss
  • Audrey De Jong
  • Julie HelmsEmail author

Dear Editor,

An unfeasibly large number of publications in recognized, peer-reviewed journals might reveal guest authorship, or some kind of fraud [1, 2]. Ioannidis et al. recently reported that some scientists were indeed disproportionably hyperprolific [1]. Although asserting that they have no evidence of any fraud, Ioannidis et al., however, suggested that these authors may “have operationalized their own definitions of what authorship means” by not fulfilling several criteria established for the authorship of medical studies. The aim of our study was therefore to investigate the perception of both authorship and conflicts of interest among the most prolific authors in critical care. These prolific authors were identified by searching Pubmed for original articles, conference papers, reviews, editorials, opinion articles, and letters, published in journals with an Impact Factor of 2017 > 5 in the Web of Science category CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE (ESM 1) between the 1 June 2013 and the...


Compliance with ethical standards

Conflicts of interest

A De Jong reports personal fees from Baxter and Medtronic-Covidien, and travel reimbursements from Fresenius-Kabi, MSD France, Astellas, Pfizer and Fisher Paykel. J. Helms reports congress and travel reimbursements from Pfizer, Diagnostica Stago, MSD France, Astrazeneca and Gilead Sciences. E. Weiss reports personal fees form Baxter, MSD France and Biomerieux, and travel reimbursements from MSD France and Eumedica. The other authors have no conflict of interest to declare.

Supplementary material

134_2019_5733_MOESM1_ESM.docx (20 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 19 kb)
134_2019_5733_MOESM2_ESM.docx (13 kb)
Supplementary material 2 (DOCX 13 kb)


  1. 1.
    Ioannidis JPA, Klavans R, Boyack KW (2018) Thousands of scientists publish a paper every five days. Nature 561(7722):167–169CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Marusic A, Bosnjak L, Jeroncic A (2011) A systematic review of research on the meaning, ethics and practices of authorship across scholarly disciplines. PLoS One 6(9):e23477CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Sauermann H, Haeussler C (2017) Authorship and contribution disclosures. Sci Adv 3(11):e1700404CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Zhang L, Dai F, Brackett A, Ai Y, Meng L (2018) Association of conflicts of interest with the results and conclusions of goal-directed hemodynamic therapy research: a systematic review with meta-analysis. Intensive Care Med 44(10):1638–1656CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Darmon M, Helms J, De Jong A, Hjortrup PB, Weiss E, Granholm A et al (2018) Time trends in the reporting of conflicts of interest, funding and affiliation with industry in intensive care research: a systematic review. Intensive Care Med 44(10):1669–1678CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Intensive CareCopenhagen University HospitalCopenhagenDenmark
  2. 2.Department of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, Policlinico San MartinoIRCCS for Oncology and NeuroscienceGenoaItaly
  3. 3.Department of Anesthesiology and Critical CareAP-HP, Beaujon HospitalClichyFrance
  4. 4.UMR_S 1149 Centre for Research on InflammationInserm/Université de ParisParisFrance
  5. 5.Department of Anesthesia and Intensive Care Unit, Regional University Hospital of Montpellier, St-Eloi HospitalPhyMedExp, University of Montpellier, INSERM U1046, CNRS UMR, 9214MontpellierFrance
  6. 6.Faculté de MédecineImmunoRhumatologie Moléculaire, INSERM UMR_S1109, LabEx TRANSPLANTEX, Centre de Recherche d’Immunologie et d’Hématologie, Fédération Hospitalo-Universitaire (FHU) OMICARE, Fédération de Médecine Translationnelle de Strasbourg (FMTS), Université de StrasbourgStrasbourgFrance
  7. 7.Service de Reanimation Médicale, Nouvel Hôpital CivilStrasbourg CedexFrance

Personalised recommendations