Volume: Papers and Academic Promotion
Authors: THOMAS P. STOSSEL
Journal: Annals of Internal Medicine (1987)

Editorials1 January 1987Volume: Papers and Academic PromotionTHOMAS P. STOSSEL, M.D.THOMAS P. STOSSEL, M.D.Author, Article, and Disclosure Informationhttps://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-106-1-146 SectionsAboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissions ShareFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail ExcerptBeginning 2 centuries ago, commentators have seen an excessive volume of scientific publications as linked to intellectual confusion, poor research design, and fraud in science (1-4). If each contributor to the literature published new and substantive knowledge, one might agree with the counterargument that the scientific literature is growing appropriately in proportion to a rising number of scientists (5) and accept the literature glut with resignation. Much of today's research, however, is done by teams, which has led to a progressive increase in multiauthored papers (6). Because the convention in biomedical research holds that the first or last authors are...References1. SPRENGEL K. Neue litterarische Nachrichten fur Aerzte, Wundaerzte und Naturforscher. 1786;1:1. Google Scholar KRONICK D (Cited by . A History of Scientific and Technical Periodicals. New York: Scarecrow Press; 1962:173.) Google Scholar2. FLETCHERFLETCHER RS. Clinical research in general medical journals: a 30-year perspective. N Engl J Med. 1979;301:180-3. CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar3. NEY E. The journal glut. Science. 1982;222:456. CrossrefGoogle Scholar4. RUBIN Z. Keeping count. NY Times Mag. 1985; Nov 2:80. Google Scholar5. ZIMAN J. The proliferation of scientific literature: a natural process. Science. 1980;208:369-71. CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar6. STRUBBLACK RF. Multiple authorship [Letter]. Lancet 1976;2:1090-1. CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar7. Summary of NIH FY 1984 Extramural Awards by Rank of Institution, Department and Activity—Departments of Medicine. Bethesda, Maryland: Statistical Analysis Branch, Division of Research Grants, National Institutes of Health; 1985. Google Scholar8. MILSTEINBURROWWILKINSONKESSEN RGLW. Prediction of interview ratings in a medical school admission process. J Med Educ. 1980;55:451-3. MedlineGoogle Scholar9. WARD L. The interview as an assessment technique. In: College Admissions. Princeton, New Jersey: College Entrance Examination Board/Educational Testing Service; 1955:62-71. Google Scholar10. GARFIELD E. Citation analysis of scientific journals. In: Citation Indexing—Its Theory and Application in Science, Technology and the Humanities. New York: John Wiley & Sons; 1979:148-252. Google Scholar11. KLEIN J. Big may not be beautiful, but it is necessary [Letter]. Cell. 1985;42:395-6. CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar12. ALBERTS B. Limits to growth: in biology, small science is good science. Cell. 1985;41:337-8. CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar13. REISMAN D. Educational reform at Harvard College. In: LIPSET SM, RIESMAN D. Education and Politics at Harvard. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1974:281-401. Google Scholar14. DE SOLLA PRICE D. The scientific foundations of science policy. Nature. 1965;206:233-8. CrossrefGoogle Scholar15. WOOLF P. The second messenger: informal communication in cyclic AMP research. Minerva. 1975;13:349-73. CrossrefGoogle Scholar16. COLECOLE JS. Social Stratification in Science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 1973. Google Scholar17. STOSSEL T. Speed. N Engl J Med. 1985;313:123-6. CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar18. CUCA J. NIH grant applications for clinical research: reasons for poor ratings or disapproval. Clin Res. 1983;31:453-63. Google Scholar19. RENNIE D. Guarding the guardians: a conference on editorial peer review. JAMA. 1986;256:2391-2. CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar This content is PDF only. To continue reading please click on the PDF icon. Author, Article, and Disclosure InformationAffiliations: Massachusetts General Hospital Boston, Massachusetts PreviousarticleNextarticle Advertisement FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Metrics Cited ByTrends in Leadership and Award Recognition Among Women in the American Society of Retina SpecialistsGender disparity in research productivity across departments in the faculty of medicine: a bibliometric analysisAssessing the Gap in Female Authorship in Neurosurgery Literature: A 20-Year Analysis of Sex Trends in AuthorshipTop-100 highest-cited original articles in inflammatory bowel diseaseWomen in Leadership Positions in Academic Cardiology: A Study of Program Directors and Division ChiefsTop 100 Most Influential Articles in the Field of Myeloid Neoplasms: A Bibliometric StudySex Differences in Authorship of Academic Cardiology Literature Over the Last 2 DecadesTop 100 Most-Cited Articles on Spontaneous Intracerebral Hemorrhage: A Bibliometric AnalysisA Scientific Analysis of the 100 Citation Classics of Valvular Heart DiseaseThe 100 Most Influential Papers in the Field of Thrombolytic Therapy: A Bibliometric AnalysisTop 100 cited articles in cardiovascular magnetic resonance: a bibliometric analysisAcademic promotion in Malaysian public universities: a critical look at issues and challengesHow we developed the GIM clinician–educator mentoring and scholarship program to assist faculty with promotion and scholarly workEqual contributions and credit given to authors in anesthesiology journals during a 10-year periodEqual contributions and credit given to authors in critical care medicine journals during a 10-yr period*Educational paper: research in oral and maxillofacial surgery"Equal" Contributions and Credit: An Emerging Trend in the Characterization of AuthorshipShort communication articles published in BJOMS during 2008–2009—an analysis of types of submission and subject materialA time to be promotedA Time to be Promoted. The Prospective Study of Promotion in Academia (Prospective Study of Promotion in Academia)Promotion criteria for clinician-educatorsLooking forward to promotionTeaching Awards and Reduced Departmental Longevity: Kiss of Death or Kiss Goodbye. What happens to Excellent Clinical Teachers in a Research Intensive Medical School?The oslerian triple-threat: an endangered species? a survey of department of medicine chairsProliferation of authors on research reports in medicineDuplicate publication in the nursing literatureAuthorship ethics in the radiological sciencesTHE JOURNAL'S PEER-REVIEW PROCESS: A TWO-WAY STREETHepatology: What a difference a decade makesData audit—historical perspectiveMedical Authorship: Traditions, Trends, and TribulationsW. Bruce Fye, MD, MAAutor, editor, revisor: cadena perpetuaRetrieval performance in online search in thermal physiologyPapers and promotion—the saga of today's academic medicineMisrepresentation and Responsibility in Medical ResearchAcademic Promotion at a Medical School 1 January 1987Volume 106, Issue 1Page: 146-149KeywordsResearch designScientists Issue Published: 1 January 1987 PDF DownloadLoading ...