BMJ’s approach to deceased authors

Preparing academic work for publication can be a lengthy process. Occasionally someone may die before the content they have worked on is published. There is no unifying industry guidance from organisations such as the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) on how to include deceased people in author lists or in terms of copyright, intellectual ownership, and publication ethics, and there is consequently ambiguity and variation in the approach taken by journals and publishers. An analysis in The BMJ by David Nunan and Jeff Aronson discusses some of the ethical issues and suggests that formal criteria are needed.1 BMJ is expanding its existing approach to improve consistency, reporting, and respect for individuals who have died before publication of their work. The approach may also reduce instances of inappropriate authorship by deceased individuals.

Variation in approach to deceased authorship makes it challenging to estimate what proportion of published content in the scholarly record is authored by people who had died before publication. Estimates in 20222 by researchers who examined the Europe PMC database for articles from 1990 to 2020 identified 1439 authors with posthumous publications. Together, these authors had published more than 38 000 papers during their careers, including more than 5000 after their deaths. The analysis suggested that acknowledgment of deceased authors had increased. In addition, half of the papers were first submitted after the death of the relevant author.

Previously, BMJ’s guidance made clear that deceased authors could be listed but offered little practical guidance on how to do this. BMJ journals will continue to publish work from people who have died and who would have been likely to have met the authorship criteria if they were still alive. Our new approach aims to improve the quality and consistency of decision making by authors and editors confronted with such situations.3 The guidance is pragmatic, author centred, and supports communication between authors, next of kin, and editors. By focusing on the contribution and likely wishes of the deceased person, BMJ aims to reduce the likelihood of disputes between those concerned.

Several important principles guide our updated approach. Authorship is typically decided by the authors, and this principle remains when one of the authors has died. Judgment on whether a deceased individual is eligible for authorship is primarily a matter for the authors. Journals rarely become involved in determining authorship and are actively discouraged from attempting to intervene in and resolve authorship disputes.45

BMJ supports the ICMJE guidance on authorship. This requires (1) substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work; (2) drafting the work or reviewing it critically for important intellectual content; (3) final approval of the version to be published; and (4) agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work.6 However, authors who have died before publication may be unable to fulfil one or more of these criteria. Some flexibility with respect to these criteria is reasonable when the surviving authors consider the person has made substantial contributions to the work. The ICMJE authorship criteria are a poor fit for non-research content, such as comment pieces, though similar principles can be applied.