An author wrote to the editor of a specialist journal, indicating that a paper had been published without appropriate recognition of himself as an author. In his letter he stated that he had contributed more than 50% of the cases reported. The first author had “not only stolen my data and published it without my consent, but also omitted my name. ” The editor has written to the authors of the paper asking for further information, but should any further action be taken?
_ Under the Vancouver guidelines, simply providing cases does not constitute authorship. _ The onus was on the journal to pursue this because the paper had now been published. _ The editor should contact the head of department, but if the institution is unwilling to look at it, then it should be left as an unresolved case. _ First of all, request an explanation from the authors.