HTU
Guidelines
The Health Telematics Unit participates
extensively in collaborative research and evaluation activities, and
welcomes opportunities to support or lead opportunities with partners in
many sectors. However, our experience has shown that such collaborative
activities require a clear understanding of the contribution expected,
and recognition of both the Health Telematics Unit and of individual
investigators or other contributors.
To this end, and to ensure consistency, the following
guidelines have been devised and adopted by the Health Telematics Unit,
and will be applied to all collaborative activities undertaken by the
HTU and / or individual HTU investigators.
Process
Potential collaborators should feel free to approach
any HTU investigator who they feel may individually, or together with
HTU colleagues, be appropriate for the proposed activity.
·
The approach must be made as early as possible in the
study proposal process (last minute submissions typically require
extensive and urgent input, and are extremely disruptive to the
interests and goals of the HTU and its investigators).
·
Sufficient information must be provided that the
expectations of the HTU and / or investigators can be reasonably judged.
The proposal will be brought forward to a monthly or
ad hoc HTU Academic and / or Strategy Group meeting for discussion, and
the decision transmitted back as soon as possible.
For the HTU to be considered the collaborative
partner, then two or more HTU investigators must be identified.
Otherwise, the individual investigator will be considered the
collaborator.
Recognition
of the Health Telematics Unit and Investigators
HTU investigators are academics who must identify and
justify their activities. Where their name is not clearly identified in
a formal study / grant application, they are not considered to be a
recognised participant and gain no academic credit. As a consequence,
the following principles will apply:
·
Where the Health Telematics Unit agrees to participate
as the collaborator, both the HTU and the individual HTU investigators
(and their role) must be clearly identified in any study material or
formal grant application.
·
Where an individual HTU investigator agrees to
participate as the collaborator, then they (and their role) must be
clearly identified in any study material or formal grant application.
Recognised
Contributions
In general terms, to be considered as an author for
any specific paper or co-investigator for any specific proposal, an
individual must have provided substantive input into one or more of the
following activities:
- Conception and design
- Drafting of the paper / proposal
- Critical revision of the paper / proposal for intellectual content
- Analysis and interpretation of data
- Statistical expertise and or analysis
For subsequent publication
of papers arising from collaborative activity, having solely
participated in the acquisition of funding or in data collection does
not justify authorship, nor does general supervision of the research
team (e.g. PI’s role, Research Assistant role).
All ‘authors’ must give final approval of the
paper / proposal before submission or publication.
Acknowledgements
Contributions that do not justify authorship (e.g.
individuals providing administrative, clerical, technical, data
collection, or logistical support) will be acknowledged by name in a
descriptive statement, in accordance with the specific requirements of
the publisher. In all cases, individuals will give their written
permission to be acknowledged by name. Finally, the granting agency
(agencies) will also be acknowledged in all publications and
presentations.
Authorship
For collaborative activities, publications (i.e. any
formal communication, including journal articles, abstracts, posters,
and reports) will invariably be multi-authored. The designation and
order of authorship is the principal means of communicating the relative
contribution of researchers with respect to the particular aspect of the
project submitted for publication. Typically the PI will take leadership
in ensuring appropriate recognition and order of authorship.
Those
that contribute most should appear first, those who contribute least
should appear last. Exceptions do exist, and if it is the intention to
follow an alternate model (e.g. where the final author is considered
senior/responsible), then this should be clearly identified and agreed
to by all other authors.
Study
Agreements
During proposal / team development, it can be of value
to prepare a study agreement in relation to publication and
dissemination of results, and authorship of such documents. This is
particularly so for large, long duration, and complex studies. A sample
document is available upon request for consideration in this regard.
