Guests and ghosts begone-guest authorship and ghostwriting and the Journal of Clinical Sleep Medicine.

203 P ublication in peer-reviewed journals is the " coin " of the academic realm. Faculty who publish extensively are more quickly and easily promoted. They also establish reputations in their area of expertise resulting in national and international recognition. This leads to speaking engagements and better credentials for research grant applications. For physicians, patient care volume may increase as a consequence of being perceived as an expert in their field of practice. All of these outcomes are considered benefits of publication in medical journals. However , with authorship comes accountability for the contents of the publication. Authorship accountability cannot occur if the author has contributed little or nothing to the intellectual content of the paper. In a recent disturbing case study of industry documents from the rofecoxib litigation, Ross et al 1 highlight a systematic practice in a large pharamaceutical firm whereby manuscripts were prepared by or for the sponsor, and lead authorship attributed to an academic physician who had little or no input into the intellectual content of the document. Compelling evidence was presented that manuscripts were prepared by the sponsor or a 3 rd party hired by the sponsor, and then authors were recruited to " headline " the paper to increase its credibility. Such a practice has been termed " guest authorship. " 2 It is difficult to conceive that recruited authors can fulfill accepted criteria for authorship, and be responsible for the intellectual content of the publication. The personal ethics of lending ones name and reputation to such a paper are certainly questionable. Just as troubling as the practice of recruiting " guest authors " may be, " ghostwriting " or the non disclosure of individuals who made substantial contributions to a manuscript is an equally significant concern. If readers are to accept the veracity of the contents of a publication, then it is essential that all persons who made important contributions be identified especially if such individuals potentially represent the interests of industry sponsors. In the case study by Ross et al, 1 there was disclosure in most cases that a study was financed by the pharmaceutical sponsor or that one or more of the authors was employed by the sponsor. However, in others, there was no disclosure of any relationships between the sponsor and the author(s). Although many papers reporting the results of industry sponsored research are balanced presentations, there is a general …