PERSPECTIVES Authorship and Bylines

From the ancient Greeks to Shakespeare, the question ofauthorship often arises. The issue of appropriate article au-thorship has always been of special interest to editors of scien-tific journals. In the biomedical sciences, as the complexity and funding of published studies increases, so does the length of the byline. Although a previous American Journal of Neuro-radiology Editor-in-Chief already addressed this issue, I think it is time to revisit it.1 Frommy own experience, articles can be categorized according to the number of authors as follows: fewer than 2 authors (Editorials, Commentaries, Letters), fewer than 5 authors (Case Reports and Technical Notes), 5–10 authors (retrospective full-length articles), 10–15 (pro-spective, often grant-funded articles), more than 15 authors (reports of task forces, white papers, etc). Among so many authors, it is not uncommon to find individuals whose contri-butions are minimal and many times questionable. Who ac