Objective: The aim of this research was to study the trends in authorship and type of article in European and North American journals of urology over the past 6 decades. Materials and Methods: Using a self-developed Visual Basic program, the number of authors per article and the type of article in four European journals (BJU International, Current Opinion in Urology, European Urology and Urologia Internationalis) and four North American journals (Journal of Urology, Urologic Clinics of North America, Urology and World Journal of Urology) were extracted from the PubMed website from January 1946 to October 2010, and the number of authors per article in each year was calculated in all the journals. Results: The average number of authors per article has increased and the percentage of single-author articles has decreased in both European and American journals. An increase in the number of authors per article was observed mainly in original articles and case reports. Since the early 1980s, there has also been a decreasing percentage of published case reports and a general increase in the percentage of letters to the editor and editorials. Conclusions: The multiple-authorship trends observed in both European and North American urology journals were similar and appeared to be mainly due to changes in original articles and case reports.

Keywords:
Urology journals, Multiple authorship, Type of article
1.
Baranowski T, Cullen KW, Baranowski J: Multiple authorship for community intervention trials. Am J Public Health 1998;88:827–828.
2.
Durani P, Rimouche S, Ross G: ‘How many plastic surgeons does it take to write a research article?’ – Authorship proliferation in and internationalisation of the plastic surgery literature. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2007;60:956–957.
3.
Howard MO, Walker RD: Multiple authorship: trends over 50 years in the Journal of Studies on Alcohol. J Stud Alcohol 1996;57:105–106.
4.
King JT Jr: How many neurosurgeons does it take to write a research article? Authorship proliferation in neurosurgical research. Neurosurgery 2000;47:435–440.
5.
Mussurakis S: Coauthorship trends in the leading radiological journals. Acta Radiol 1993;34:316–320.
6.
Rahman L, Muirhead-Allwood SK: How many orthopedic surgeons does it take to write a research article? 50 years of authorship proliferation in and internationalization of the orthopedic surgery literature. Orthopedics 2010;33:478.
7.
Shaban S: Multiple authorship trends in prestigious journals from 1950 to 2005. Saudi Med J 2007;28:927–932.
8.
Shaban S, Aw TC: Trend towards multiple authorship in occupational medicine journals. J Occup Med Toxicol 2009;4:3.
9.
Weeks WB, Wallace AE, Kimberly BC: Changes in authorship patterns in prestigious US medical journals. Soc Sci Med 2004;59:1949–1954.
10.
Rennie D: Who did what? Authorship and contribution in 2001. Muscle Nerve 2001;24:1274–1277.
12.
ISI Web of Knowledge. http://admin.isiknowledge.com.
13.
Schroder FH, Hugosson J, Roobol MJ, Tammela TL, Ciatto S, Nelen V, Kwiatkowski M, Lujan M, Lilja H, Zappa M, et al: Screening and prostate cancer mortality in a randomized European study. N Engl J Med 2009;360:1320–1328.
14.
Bill-Axelson A, Holmberg L, Ruutu M, Haggman M, Andersson SO, Bratell S, Spangberg A, Busch C, Nordling S, Garmo H, et al: Radical prostatectomy versus watchful waiting in early prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 2005;352:1977–1984.
15.
Wendt-Nordahl G, Rotert H, Trojan L, Michel MS, Peters CR, Alken P, Knoll T: Intravenous contrast media in uroradiology: evaluation of safety and tolerability in almost 50,000 patients. Med Princ Pract 2006;15:358–361.
16.
Schott G, Pachl H, Limbach U, Gundert-Remy U, Lieb K, Ludwig WD: The financing of drug trials by pharmaceutical companies and its consequences: part 2: a qualitative, systematic review of the literature on possible influences on authorship, access to trial data, and trial registration and publication. Dtsch Arztebl Int 2010;107:295–301.
17.
Hirsch LJ: Conflicts of interest, authorship, and disclosures in industry-related scientific publications: the tort bar and editorial oversight of medical journals. Mayo Clin Proc 2009;84:811–821.
18.
Baskin PK, Knopman DS, Gross RA: Conflicts of interest, authorship, and disclosures in industry-related scientific publications. Mayo Clin Proc 2010;85:196–197; author 201–204.
19.
Kennedy D: Multiple authors, multiple problems. Science 2003;301:733.
20.
International Committee of Medical Journal Editors: Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals: Writing and Editing for Biomedical Publication. http://www.icmje.org/urm_full.pdf. 2010.
21.
Lazar R: Up for grabs – authors are a dime a dozen: the problem of multiple authors. Acta Paediatr 2004;93:589–591.
22.
Schechter AN, Wyngaarden JB, Edsall JT, Maddox J, Relman AS, Angell M, Stewart WW: Colloquium on scientific authorship: rights and responsibilities. Faseb J 1989;3:209–217.
23.
Rennie D: Integrity in scientific publishing. Health Serv Res 2010;45:885–896.
24.
Rennie D, Flanagin A, Yank V: The contributions of authors. Jama 2000;284:89–91.
25.
Yank V, Rennie D: Disclosure of researcher contributions: a study of original research articles in The Lancet. Ann Intern Med 1999;130:661–670.
26.
Mant D: Can randomised trials inform clinical decisions about individual patients? Lancet 1999;353:743–746.
© 2012 S. Karger AG, Basel
2012
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.