Disclose your relationships

Oct 13, 2025 by wbrum.org 105 views

Managing Conflicts of Interest in Academic Publishing: A Guide to Co-Authorship in Scoping Reviews

As an academic researcher, you may find yourself in a situation where you are invited to conduct and publish a rapid scoping review in a journal, while also being a co-author on one of the included papers. This can create a conflict of interest, which must be managed carefully to maintain the integrity and credibility of the review. In this article, we will explore the challenges of co-authorship in scoping reviews and provide guidance on how to navigate these complex situations.

Understanding Co-Authorship in Scoping Reviews

A scoping review is a type of literature review that aims to map the existing research on a particular topic, identifying key concepts, themes, and gaps in the literature. As a co-author on one of the included papers, you may have a vested interest in the outcome of the review, which can create a conflict of interest. This conflict can arise from several sources, including:

Financial interests: If you have received funding for your research, you may have a financial stake in the outcome of the review.
Personal relationships: If you have a personal relationship with one of the authors on the included paper, you may be influenced by this relationship in your evaluation of the paper.
Professional interests: If you have a professional interest in the topic area, you may be motivated to promote certain findings or interpretations over others.

Managing Conflicts of Interest

To manage conflicts of interest in co-authorship, it is essential to be transparent and open about your relationships and interests. Here are some steps you can take:

Disclose your relationships: Inform your co-investigators and the journal editor about your co-authorship on the included paper. This will help to ensure that your relationships and interests are taken into account in the review process.
Recuse yourself from decision-making: If you are involved in the decision-making process for the review, you may need to recuse yourself from discussions and decisions related to the paper on which you are a co-author.
Seek advice from colleagues: If you are unsure about how to manage your conflict of interest, seek advice from colleagues or mentors who have experience in similar situations.
Consider a separate review: If the conflict of interest is too great, you may need to consider conducting a separate review of the paper on which you are a co-author.

Best Practices for Co-Authorship in Scoping Reviews

To avoid conflicts of interest in co-authorship, it is essential to follow best practices for scoping reviews. Here are some guidelines to follow:

Use a systematic search strategy: A systematic search strategy can help to ensure that all relevant papers are included in the review, reducing the risk of bias.
Use a transparent inclusion and exclusion criteria: Clearly define the inclusion and exclusion criteria for the review, and ensure that these criteria are applied consistently.
Use a data extraction tool: A data extraction tool can help to ensure that data are extracted consistently and accurately from the included papers.
Involve multiple reviewers: Involve multiple reviewers in the review process to reduce the risk of bias and ensure that different perspectives are taken into account.

Conclusion

Co-authorship in scoping reviews can create complex conflicts of interest, which must be managed carefully to maintain the integrity and credibility of the review. By being transparent and open about your relationships and interests, recusing yourself from decision-making, seeking advice from colleagues, and following best practices for scoping reviews, you can navigate these complex situations and produce high-quality reviews that contribute to the advancement of knowledge in your field.

Recommendations for Future Research

Future research should focus on developing guidelines and best practices for managing conflicts of interest in co-authorship in scoping reviews. Additionally, researchers should explore ways to reduce the risk of bias in scoping reviews, such as using systematic search strategies and involving multiple reviewers.

Limitations of the Current Study

The current study has several limitations, including:

Small sample size: The study is based on a small sample size, which may limit the generalizability of the findings.
Limited scope: The study focuses on co-authorship in scoping reviews, which may not be representative of all types of research.

Future Directions

Future research should focus on exploring the impact of co-authorship on the outcome of scoping reviews, as well as developing guidelines and best practices for managing conflicts of interest in co-authorship. Additionally, researchers should explore ways to reduce the risk of bias in scoping reviews, such as using systematic search strategies and involving multiple reviewers.

References

[1]: [Reference 1]
[2]: [Reference 2]
[3]: [Reference 3]

Appendix

Appendix 1: [Appendix 1]
Appendix 2: [Appendix 2]

Glossary

Co-authorship: The act of sharing authorship on a research paper or publication.
Conflict of interest: A situation in which an individual or organization has a personal or financial interest that may influence their judgment or decision-making.
Scoping review: A type of literature review that aims to map the existing research on a particular topic, identifying key concepts, themes, and gaps in the literature.
Frequently Asked Questions: Managing Conflicts of Interest in Co-Authorship in Scoping Reviews

As an academic researcher, you may have questions about managing conflicts of interest in co-authorship in scoping reviews. In this article, we will address some of the most frequently asked questions in this area.

Q: What is a conflict of interest in co-authorship?

A: A conflict of interest in co-authorship occurs when an individual has a personal or financial interest that may influence their judgment or decision-making in the review process. This can include financial interests, personal relationships, or professional interests.

Q: How do I disclose my relationships and interests?

A: To disclose your relationships and interests, inform your co-investigators and the journal editor about your co-authorship on the included paper. This will help to ensure that your relationships and interests are taken into account in the review process.

Q: Do I need to recuse myself from decision-making?

A: Yes, if you are involved in the decision-making process for the review, you may need to recuse yourself from discussions and decisions related to the paper on which you are a co-author.

Q: What are the best practices for scoping reviews?

A: The best practices for scoping reviews include:

Using a systematic search strategy
Using a transparent inclusion and exclusion criteria
Using a data extraction tool
Involving multiple reviewers

Q: How can I reduce the risk of bias in scoping reviews?

A: To reduce the risk of bias in scoping reviews, use systematic search strategies, involve multiple reviewers, and use data extraction tools.

Q: What are the consequences of not managing conflicts of interest in co-authorship?

A: The consequences of not managing conflicts of interest in co-authorship can include:

Loss of credibility and reputation
Rejection of the review by the journal
Damage to relationships with colleagues and peers

Q: How can I seek advice from colleagues and mentors?

A: To seek advice from colleagues and mentors, reach out to them directly and ask for their guidance and expertise. You can also seek advice from professional organizations and academic societies.

Q: What are the limitations of the current study?

A: The limitations of the current study include:

Small sample size
Limited scope

Q: What are the future directions for research in this area?

A: Future research should focus on developing guidelines and best practices for managing conflicts of interest in co-authorship in scoping reviews. Additionally, researchers should explore ways to reduce the risk of bias in scoping reviews.

Q: What are the key takeaways from this article?

A: The key takeaways from this article are:

Conflicts of interest in co-authorship can create complex situations that must be managed carefully
Transparency and open communication are essential in managing conflicts of interest
Best practices for scoping reviews include using systematic search strategies, transparent inclusion and exclusion criteria, and involving multiple reviewers
Seeking advice from colleagues and mentors is essential in managing conflicts of interest