Publication Planning and Scientific Writing
What this domain tests
This domain tests how industry-sponsored science reaches the literature legitimately: authorship criteria, planning, reporting standards, review, and the ethical failures that examiners love to test.
Core rules
- ICMJE authorship requires all four: substantial contribution to conception/design or acquisition/analysis/interpretation; drafting or critical revision; final approval of the version submitted; and accountability for the work.
- Good Publication Practice (GPP) requires a documented publication plan, professional medical writing disclosed in acknowledgements, sponsor and author role transparency, and author control over content and submission decisions.
- Ghost, guest and gift authorship are misconduct. Contributors who do not meet all four criteria belong in acknowledgements with permission.
- Trial registration before first enrolment and results posting are prerequisites for publication in most journals. Reporting guidelines apply: CONSORT for randomised trials, STROBE for observational studies, PRISMA for systematic reviews.
- Company review is medical, regulatory, legal and statistical; it may correct factual and legal errors but may not remove unfavourable data or delay publication indefinitely. Plain-language summaries and data-sharing statements are increasingly expected.
Worked example
A statistician performed the analysis but did not draft or revise the manuscript. Reasoning: analysis alone satisfies only the first criterion. To be an author they must also participate in drafting or critical revision, approve the final version, and accept accountability; otherwise they are acknowledged as a contributor. Adding a department head who did nothing would be guest authorship.
Traps that cost marks
- Assuming seniority or funding confers authorship.
- Using medical-legal review to delete inconvenient results.
- Choosing a predatory journal because it offers fast acceptance.