How to Determine Authorship on a Scientific Paper: ICMJE Criteria Explained
By Dr. Zubair Khalid, DVM, MS, PhD ·
Quick Answer
- Authorship on a scientific paper requires meeting all four ICMJE criteria, beyond contributing data or performing technical work.
- Use the four-criteria checklist before submitting a manuscript and discuss authorship with your team at the project start.
- The criteria are a professional standard, not a legal rule, and journals may apply additional authorship policies.
Why Authorship Decisions Matter in Research
Authorship is the formal record of who is responsible for a published work. It carries credit for the work done and accountability for what the paper says. When authorship is assigned incorrectly, the scientific record becomes harder to trust and the people who did the work may not receive proper recognition.
Research institutions, funding agencies, and journals treat authorship as a matter of research integrity. The Committee on Publication Ethics includes authorship in its Core Practices, which describe the responsibilities of editors, journals, and publishers in handling authorship disputes and ensuring that credit is given fairly. The National Library of Medicine hosts research methods resources that discuss the standards for responsible conduct of research, including how authorship is assigned and reviewed.
For a researcher, the practical problem is straightforward. You are preparing a manuscript and need to know who should be listed as an author. The answer is not based on who worked hardest or who holds the highest position in the lab. It is based on a defined set of criteria that the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors, known as ICMJE, has established. These criteria are widely used by biomedical journals and are a useful framework for any scientific field.
The Four ICMJE Criteria for Authorship
The ICMJE authorship framework is built on four conditions. A person qualifies as an author only when they meet all four. The criteria are designed to separate people who made a genuine intellectual contribution from those who provided support, funding, or supervision without taking part in the actual research work.
Substantial Contribution to the Work
The first criterion requires a substantial contribution to the conception or design of the work, or to the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data. This is not about being present in the lab or being listed on a grant. It is about making a real intellectual contribution to the research itself.
A person who designed the study protocol, developed the research question, or planned the statistical analysis meets this part of the criterion. A person who collected samples under a fixed protocol without contributing to the design or analysis may not meet it. A person who analyzed the data and interpreted what the results mean also meets this part.
The key word is substantial. Routine technical work, such as running a standard assay or preparing a buffer, does not by itself qualify as a substantial contribution. The contribution must be meaningful enough that the person is genuinely responsible for part of the intellectual content of the paper.
Drafting or Revising the Work
The second criterion requires that the person draft the work or revise it critically for important intellectual content. This is a separate requirement from the first. A person who contributed to the data collection but never read the manuscript or provided feedback on the writing does not meet this criterion.
Drafting means writing a meaningful portion of the manuscript, beyond providing a sentence or two. Revising critically means reading the full manuscript and making substantive comments on the methods, results, or interpretation. A person who only checks the spelling or formatting does not meet this criterion.
This criterion is often the one that surprises researchers. A lab technician who collected all the data but never participated in writing or revising the manuscript does not qualify as an author under the ICMJE framework. The person may be acknowledged in the paper, but they are not an author.
Final Approval of the Version to Be Published
The third criterion requires that the person give final approval of the version of the manuscript that is to be published. This means the person must read the complete manuscript and agree that it is ready for publication.
This is not a formality. The person is taking responsibility for the content of the paper. If there is an error in the data or the interpretation, the author is accountable. Final approval is the point at which the person says, I have read this paper and I am willing to be associated with it.
This criterion is why a person cannot be added as an author after the manuscript is submitted without their knowledge. The person must have seen and approved the final version.
Agreement to Be Accountable
The fourth criterion requires that the person agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work. This means the person must be able to answer questions about the accuracy and integrity of the research.
If a question arises about a specific result, the author must be able to explain it. If there is an allegation of misconduct, the author must be willing to participate in the investigation. This criterion is what makes authorship a matter of responsibility, beyond credit.
The four criteria work together. A person who meets all four is an author. A person who meets only one or two is not an author under the ICMJE framework.
At a Glance: Authorship Decision Table
| Criterion | What It Means in Practice | Example of Meeting It | Example of Not Meeting It |
|---|---|---|---|
| Substantial contribution | Intellectual input to design, data collection, analysis, or interpretation | Designing the study protocol or interpreting the statistical results | Running a standard assay under a fixed protocol |
| Drafting or revising | Writing or critically revising the manuscript for intellectual content | Writing the methods section or providing detailed comments on the results | Checking the manuscript for typos only |
| Final approval | Approving the version to be published | Reading the full manuscript and approving it for submission | Being told the paper was submitted without seeing it |
| Accountability | Agreeing to be responsible for the work | Being willing to answer questions about the data and methods | Being unavailable or unwilling to discuss the work |
How to Apply the ICMJE Criteria in Your Lab
Applying the criteria requires a deliberate process. You cannot decide authorship at the end of the project and expect the decision to be fair. The process should start early and be documented.
Step 1: Identify Potential Authors at the Start
At the beginning of a research project, discuss authorship with everyone who is likely to contribute. This is not a binding contract, but it sets expectations. The discussion should include the planned roles and the criteria that will be used to determine authorship.
The National Institutes of Health provides guidance on research conduct and grant management through its grants and funding pages. While the NIH does not set a single authorship policy for all journals, it does expect researchers to follow responsible research practices. Discussing authorship early is part of that responsibility.
Step 2: Track Contributions as the Work Progresses
Keep a record of who does what. This can be a simple spreadsheet or a lab notebook entry. The record should note who designed the experiments, who collected the data, who analyzed the data, and who interpreted the results.
This record is useful when the manuscript is being written. It prevents disputes about who contributed what. It also helps you identify people who may qualify as authors and people who should be acknowledged instead.
Step 3: Use the Four Criteria as a Checklist
When the manuscript is ready, apply the four criteria to each person who is being considered for authorship. The person must meet all four. If a person meets only three, they do not qualify as an author under the ICMJE framework.
The checklist is a practical tool. It forces you to answer four questions for each person. Did they contribute substantially? Did they draft or revise the manuscript? Did they approve the final version? Did they agree to be accountable? If the answer to any question is no, the person is not an author.
Step 4: Document the Decision
Write down the authorship decision and the reasons for it. This documentation is useful if a dispute arises later. It also helps the corresponding author explain the authorship list to the journal if the journal asks.
The documentation does not need to be formal. A short note in the lab records that states who is an author and why is sufficient.
Options and Tradeoffs in Authorship Decisions
The ICMJE criteria are a framework, not a set of rules that cover every situation. There are several decisions that researchers must make that the criteria do not fully resolve.
Guest Authorship
Guest authorship is the practice of adding a person who does not meet the criteria to the author list. This is sometimes done to honor a senior researcher or to increase the chance of publication. The ICMJE criteria do not support this practice. A person who does not meet all four criteria should not be listed as an author.
The Committee on Publication Ethics Core Practices address authorship and misconduct. Adding a guest author is a form of authorship abuse because it misrepresents who is responsible for the work. It also creates a problem for the guest author, who is now accountable for work they did not do.
Ghost Authorship
Ghost authorship is the opposite of guest authorship. It occurs when a person who meets the criteria is not listed as an author. This can happen when a professional writer drafts the manuscript but is not credited, or when a junior researcher does the work but is left off the author list.
Ghost authorship is also a problem. It hides the people who are responsible for the work. The Committee on Publication Ethics Core Practices expects that all authors who meet the criteria be listed.
Order of Authors
The ICMJE criteria do not specify the order of authors. The order is a matter of convention and varies by field. In some fields, the first author is the person who did the most work. In others, the last author is the senior researcher. The corresponding author is the person who handles the manuscript and communicates with the journal.
The order of authors should be discussed and agreed upon by the team. It should not be changed without the agreement of all authors. The order is a matter of professional judgment and institutional practice, not a matter of the ICMJE criteria.
Acknowledgment vs. Authorship
People who do not meet the authorship criteria can be acknowledged in the manuscript. This includes people who provided technical help, writing assistance, or general support. The acknowledgment section is the appropriate place for these contributions.
The distinction between acknowledgment and authorship is important. Acknowledgment gives credit without the responsibility of authorship. It is appropriate for people who contributed to the work but did not make the intellectual contribution required for authorship.
Records and Measurements for Authorship Decisions
Authorship decisions should be based on records, not on memory. The records you keep during the project are the evidence you use to decide who is an author.
Contribution Log
A contribution log is a simple record of who did what. It can be a table with columns for the person, the task, and the date. The log should be updated as the project progresses.
The log is useful when the manuscript is being written. It helps you identify who meets the first criterion, substantial contribution. It also helps you identify who should be acknowledged.
Manuscript Review Record
The manuscript review record shows who drafted and revised the manuscript. This can be a record of the versions of the manuscript and who contributed to each version. It is useful for the second criterion.
The record should show who wrote the first draft, who provided comments, and who approved the final version. This record is also useful if a dispute arises about who approved the manuscript.
ORCID and Researcher Identity
ORCID provides a persistent identifier for researchers. It is a way to connect a researcher to their work. The ORCID for Researchers page explains how researchers can use ORCID to maintain a record of their publications and contributions.
ORCID is not a tool for deciding authorship. It is a tool for recording authorship. When a paper is published, the authors can link their ORCID records to the paper. This creates a public record of the authorship.
Common Failure Patterns in Authorship Decisions
There are several common ways that authorship decisions go wrong. Knowing these patterns can help you avoid them.
Adding Authors After Submission
A common failure is adding an author after the manuscript has been submitted. This is a problem because the new author has not approved the version that was submitted. The ICMJE criteria require final approval of the version to be published.
If an author is added after submission, the journal must be notified. The journal may require a reason for the change. The new author must be given the opportunity to review the manuscript and approve it.
Leaving Out a Contributor
Another failure is leaving out a person who meets the criteria. This can happen when a person contributed to the data analysis but was not involved in the writing. The person may not be considered because they are not in the lab anymore or because they are not in the same department.
The criteria are clear. If the person meets all four criteria, they must be an author. Leaving them out is a form of misconduct.
Including a Person Who Does Not Meet the Criteria
The opposite failure is including a person who does not meet the criteria. This is often done to honor a senior researcher or to add a name that will help the paper be accepted. This is guest authorship and it is not allowed under the ICMJE framework.
Not Documenting the Decision
A failure that is less visible but still important is not documenting the authorship decision. When the decision is not documented, it is difficult to resolve disputes. The documentation is the record that shows who was considered and why.
Limitations of the ICMJE Criteria
The ICMJE criteria are widely used, but they have limitations. You should be aware of these limitations when you apply the criteria.
Not a Legal Standard
The ICMJE criteria are a professional standard, not a legal one. They are not written into law. A court or a funding agency may have a different definition of authorship. The criteria are a guide for professional conduct, not a rule that is enforced by a government.
Not a Universal Standard
The ICMJE criteria are used by many biomedical journals, but not all journals use them. Some journals have their own authorship policies. Some fields, such as physics or mathematics, have different conventions for authorship. You should check the journal's instructions for authors before you decide on authorship.
The Criteria Do Not Cover All Situations
The four criteria do not cover every situation. They do not address the order of authors. They do not address the case of a person who contributes to the design but not to the writing. They do not address the case of a person who is involved in the research but not in the manuscript.
These situations require professional judgment. The criteria are a starting point, not a complete answer.
The Role of the Corresponding Author
The corresponding author is the person who communicates with the journal. This person is responsible for the submission process, for responding to the journal's questions, and for ensuring that all authors have approved the manuscript.
The corresponding author is not necessarily the first author. The corresponding author is the person who is the point of contact. This role is important for the authorship process because the corresponding author is the person who ensures that the authorship criteria are met.
The corresponding author should confirm that all authors meet the criteria. They should also confirm that all authors have approved the final version. This is a responsibility that is part of the corresponding author role.
The Role of the Journal
The journal has a role in the authorship process. The journal may ask for a statement of contributions. The journal may also ask for the ORCID identifiers of the authors. The journal may have its own authorship policy.
The Committee on Publication Ethics Core Practices describe the responsibilities of journals in handling authorship. The journal is expected to have a clear policy on authorship and to enforce it. The journal is also expected to handle authorship disputes in a fair and transparent way.
The journal is not the primary decision maker for authorship. The authors decide who is an author. The journal verifies that the decision is consistent with its policy.
Data Management and Authorship
The NIH Data Management and Sharing Policy describes the expectations for data management and sharing for NIH-funded research. This policy is relevant to authorship because it affects the data that is included in the paper.
The data management and sharing policy requires that data be managed and shared in a way that is consistent with the research. This means that the data must be available for the paper to be verified. The authors are responsible for the data that is in the paper.
The data management and sharing policy is a reminder that authorship is beyond about the manuscript. It is also about the data that supports the manuscript. The authors are accountable for the data.
Reporting Guidelines and Authorship
The EQUATOR Network provides reporting guidelines for health research. These guidelines are designed to improve the transparency and completeness of research reporting. The EQUATOR Network is a resource for finding the right reporting guideline for a study.
The reporting guidelines are relevant to authorship because they affect the content of the manuscript. The authors are responsible for following the reporting guideline. The reporting guideline may require the authors to describe the methods in a specific way.
The reporting guidelines are not a substitute for the authorship criteria. They are a separate set of requirements that affect the manuscript. The authors must meet both the authorship criteria and the reporting guidelines.
Professional Escalation Criteria
There are situations where you should escalate an authorship issue to a higher authority. These are situations where the issue cannot be resolved within the research team.
Dispute Among Authors
If the authors cannot agree on the authorship, the issue should be escalated. The first step is to discuss the issue with the research team. If the issue cannot be resolved, the issue should be brought to the department head or the research integrity office.
The Committee on Publication Ethics Core Practices addresses the handling of authorship disputes. The institution is responsible for resolving the dispute. The institution may have a policy for handling authorship disputes.
Allegation of Misconduct
If there is an allegation of misconduct related to authorship, the issue should be escalated. This is a serious matter. The institution has a responsibility to investigate the allegation.
The allegation may be about a guest author, a ghost author, or a person who is not accountable for the work. The institution should investigate the allegation and take appropriate action.
Request for a Change in Authorship
If a request is made to change the authorship after the manuscript has been submitted, the issue should be escalated to the journal. The journal has a policy for handling authorship changes. The journal may require a letter from all authors.
The journal is responsible for the integrity of the published record. The journal will not allow a change that is not justified.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the difference between an author and a contributor?
An author meets all four ICMJE criteria. A contributor may have helped with the work but does not meet all four criteria. A contributor can be acknowledged in the manuscript.
Can a person who collected all the data be an author?
A person who collected all the data may be an author if they also meet the other three criteria. If the person only collected the data and did not contribute to the design, the writing, or the approval, they are not an author under the ICMJE framework.
Who decides the order of authors?
The order of authors is decided by the research team. The ICMJE criteria do not specify the order. The order is a matter of professional judgment and is often based on the level of contribution.
What should I do if I am left off a paper?
If you believe you meet the four ICMJE criteria and you are not listed as an author, you should discuss the issue with the corresponding author. If the issue is not resolved, you should escalate the issue to the institution.
Can a person be an author if they only provided funding?
No. Providing funding does not meet the ICMJE criteria. A person who only provided funding is not an author. They may be acknowledged in the manuscript.
What is the role of the corresponding author?
The corresponding author is the person who communicates with the journal. They are responsible for the manuscript and for ensuring that all authors have approved the final version.
Do all journals use the ICMJE criteria?
No. The ICMJE criteria are used by many biomedical journals, but not all journals. You should check the journal's instructions for authors to see the policy.
What is the difference between acknowledgment and authorship?
Acknowledgment is a way to give credit to a person who helped with the work but does not meet the authorship criteria. Authorship is a way to give credit and responsibility to a person who meets all four criteria.
Using the Evidence
| Source | Best use in this topic | Important limitation |
|---|---|---|
| Research Methods Resources | official guidance | Check the linked page for current local requirements |
| EQUATOR Network | official guidance | Check the linked page for current local requirements |
| Core Practices | official guidance | Check the linked page for current local requirements |
Related Articles
- How to Read a Scientific Paper Efficiently
- How to Write a Scientific Paper Abstract: A Practical Guide
- Scientific Paper Format: A Guide to IMRaD and Beyond
- Choosing the Right Citation Style for Your Scientific Paper
- Citing Scientific Papers: A Guide to Common Citation Styles
References and Further Reading
- Research Methods Resources. National Library of Medicine.
- EQUATOR Network. EQUATOR Network.
- Core Practices. Committee on Publication Ethics.
- NIH Grants and Funding. National Institutes of Health.
- ORCID for Researchers. ORCID.
- Data Management and Sharing Policy. National Institutes of Health.
- NCBI Literature Resources. National Center for Biotechnology Information.
- PubMed. National Library of Medicine.
This article is educational and does not replace institutional policy, professional advice, or applicable safety and regulatory requirements.