Authorship Criteria

The Digital Health & Telemonitoring Advances recognizes authorship as both scholarly credit and responsibility for published work. Authorship should accurately identify individuals who have made substantial intellectual contributions to a manuscript and who are prepared to accept appropriate accountability for the accuracy, integrity, and scholarly content of the work.

The journal does not permit honorary, guest, gift, purchased, coercive, or ghost authorship. Individuals should neither be listed as authors without sufficient contribution nor excluded from authorship when their contribution legitimately satisfies the journal's authorship requirements.

Authors are expected to determine authorship responsibly before manuscript submission and to maintain transparent communication concerning individual contributions throughout the research and publication process.

1. Core Authorship Requirements

To qualify as an author, an individual should satisfy all four of the following requirements:

  1. Substantial Contribution
    The individual must have made a substantial contribution to the conception or design of the work; acquisition, generation, analysis, or interpretation of data; development or evaluation of a digital-health intervention, clinical protocol, computational model, telemonitoring system, or other substantive component of the study.

  2. Manuscript Development or Critical Intellectual Review
    The individual must have participated in drafting the manuscript or critically reviewing it for important intellectual content.

  3. Approval of the Final Version
    The individual must review and approve the final version submitted for publication and, following revision, the version accepted for publication.

  4. Accountability
    The individual must agree to be accountable for their own contributions and cooperate in resolving legitimate questions concerning the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work.

Individuals who satisfy only one or some of these requirements should ordinarily be recognized as contributors rather than listed automatically as authors.

2. Authorship as Accountability

Authorship is not limited to receiving scholarly credit.

Each author should:

  • understand the principal purpose and findings of the manuscript;

  • know the nature of their own contribution;

  • be able to identify the contributions of coauthors where appropriate;

  • have reasonable confidence in the integrity of the collaborative work;

  • respond to legitimate editorial questions concerning their contribution; and

  • cooperate in resolving concerns arising before or after publication.

An author should not disclaim all responsibility for a published article merely because a concern relates to a section prepared primarily by another coauthor.

3. Contributions That May Support Authorship

Depending on the research design, substantive contributions may include:

  • study conception;

  • research design;

  • clinical protocol development;

  • telemedicine intervention design;

  • remote patient-monitoring system development;

  • digital-health technology evaluation;

  • software or algorithm development;

  • artificial intelligence model development;

  • acquisition of research data;

  • patient or participant recruitment involving substantial intellectual contribution;

  • statistical analysis;

  • computational analysis;

  • qualitative analysis;

  • interpretation of findings;

  • methodology development;

  • validation;

  • drafting the manuscript;

  • substantive intellectual revision; and

  • integration of multidisciplinary findings.

Performance of a technical activity alone does not automatically justify authorship unless the individual's overall contribution also satisfies the complete authorship requirements.

4. Activities That Do Not Automatically Qualify for Authorship

The following activities, when performed alone, do not ordinarily justify authorship:

  • obtaining research funding;

  • providing general administrative supervision;

  • routine data collection without substantive intellectual contribution;

  • routine technical assistance;

  • language editing;

  • proofreading;

  • copyediting;

  • formatting;

  • providing laboratory space;

  • providing equipment;

  • routine patient referral;

  • institutional leadership;

  • general departmental supervision;

  • payment of publication expenses;

  • facilitating access to participants;

  • providing software without scholarly involvement in the study; or

  • offering general advice that does not constitute a substantial intellectual contribution.

Individuals making valuable contributions that do not satisfy authorship requirements may be acknowledged with their permission.

5. Contributorship Statement

To improve transparency, manuscripts should provide a clear description of individual author contributions where required by the journal or relevant to the complexity of the work.

Contribution statements may identify roles such as:

  • conceptualization;

  • methodology;

  • investigation;

  • data collection;

  • data curation;

  • statistical analysis;

  • software;

  • validation;

  • visualization;

  • interpretation;

  • manuscript drafting;

  • critical review and editing;

  • supervision;

  • project administration; and

  • funding acquisition.

A contributorship statement does not itself create eligibility for authorship. Each listed author must still satisfy the journal's authorship requirements.

6. Author Order

The order of authors should be determined collectively by the authors according to their contributions and disciplinary conventions.

The journal does not determine author order on behalf of research teams except where correction of the scholarly record becomes necessary.

Authors should resolve the sequence of names before submission wherever possible.

Disagreements concerning author order should not be concealed from the journal where they materially affect manuscript processing.

7. First Author

The first author is generally expected to have made a substantial contribution to the research and manuscript preparation.

However, author position alone does not define responsibility or contribution. The contribution statement should provide a more transparent account of each author's role where applicable.

Designation as first author does not reduce the accountability of other listed authors.

8. Corresponding Author

One author should ordinarily be designated as the Corresponding Author.

The corresponding author serves as the principal point of communication between the journal and the authors during submission, peer review, production, and post-publication correspondence.

The corresponding author is responsible for:

  • ensuring that all legitimate authors are included;

  • ensuring that individuals who do not qualify are not listed as authors;

  • confirming that all authors have approved the submitted manuscript;

  • providing accurate author names and affiliations;

  • communicating editorial decisions and reviewer comments to coauthors;

  • coordinating revisions;

  • ensuring submission of required declarations;

  • responding to editorial correspondence in a timely manner; and

  • maintaining communication with coauthors where concerns arise after publication.

Corresponding authorship does not imply ownership of the research or exclusive responsibility for the manuscript.

9. Author Approval Before Submission

Before submission, all authors should:

  • review the manuscript;

  • approve the submitted version;

  • agree to authorship;

  • agree to the author order;

  • confirm their affiliations;

  • understand the journal to which the work is being submitted; and

  • consent to the submission.

A manuscript must not be submitted in an individual's name without that person's knowledge and approval.

10. Accuracy of Author Information

Authors are responsible for ensuring that names, affiliations, academic details, and other author metadata are accurate.

Affiliations should represent genuine institutional relationships relevant to the work.

Authors must not:

  • invent affiliations;

  • use institutions without legitimate association;

  • misrepresent academic positions;

  • provide false ORCID identifiers;

  • manipulate institutional information to increase perceived credibility; or

  • list nonexistent departments or organizations.

Where an author's affiliation changed after the research was completed, a current address may be provided separately where appropriate.

11. ORCID Identifiers

Authors are encouraged to provide a valid ORCID identifier where available.

An ORCID should correspond to the author to whom it is assigned and must not be fabricated, shared, or assigned to another individual.

Providing an ORCID does not substitute for accurate authorship and affiliation information.

12. Honorary, Guest, and Gift Authorship

The journal does not permit inclusion of individuals as authors solely because of:

  • seniority;

  • institutional position;

  • departmental leadership;

  • professional prestige;

  • provision of funding;

  • personal relationships;

  • expectation of reciprocal authorship; or

  • desire to increase the perceived authority of the manuscript.

Such practices misrepresent scholarly contribution and undermine transparency.

13. Ghost Authorship

Individuals who make substantial contributions that satisfy authorship requirements should not be deliberately omitted from the author list.

Ghost authorship may include undisclosed involvement of individuals who substantially:

  • designed the study;

  • analyzed or interpreted data;

  • developed the manuscript;

  • prepared major sections of the article; or

  • controlled the intellectual direction of the research.

Professional writing or editorial assistance that does not satisfy authorship criteria should instead be acknowledged appropriately and, where relevant, its source of funding disclosed.

14. Purchased or Sold Authorship

The purchase, sale, transfer, or commercial exchange of authorship positions is prohibited.

The journal may investigate concerns involving:

  • paid addition of authors;

  • sale of author positions;

  • authorship offered after completion of the research;

  • authorship brokering;

  • manuscript-selling services; or

  • fabricated research collaborations.

Where credible evidence indicates manipulated authorship, the manuscript may be rejected or, if already published, considered under the journal's research-integrity and correction policies.

15. Coercive Authorship

No individual should be included as an author because of institutional pressure, professional authority, supervisory power, or threat of adverse consequences.

Senior researchers and supervisors should not require authorship where their contribution does not satisfy the journal's criteria.

Similarly, legitimate contributors should not be excluded because of differences in academic rank or employment status.

16. Student and Researcher Authorship

Students, doctoral researchers, trainees, junior researchers, clinicians, technical researchers, and other contributors should receive authorship when their contributions satisfy the same criteria applied to other authors.

Academic rank or employment status should not determine authorship eligibility.

Supervisors should not automatically receive authorship solely because the work was conducted within their department, laboratory, institution, or research program.

17. Multidisciplinary and Collaborative Research

Digital health and telemonitoring research frequently involves collaboration among clinicians, engineers, data scientists, statisticians, software developers, behavioral scientists, health-services researchers, and other specialists.

The journal recognizes the importance of multidisciplinary contribution while maintaining the same authorship principles for all disciplines.

A collaborator should be listed as an author when their overall contribution satisfies the journal's authorship requirements, regardless of professional discipline.

18. Group and Consortium Authorship

Research conducted by a consortium, collaborative network, working group, or multicenter study group may use group authorship where appropriate.

The submission should clearly identify:

  • the group or consortium name;

  • individuals who qualify as authors;

  • corresponding-author responsibility; and

  • contributor information where applicable.

Large-group authorship should not be used to obscure responsibility or include individuals who did not make appropriate contributions.

19. Multicenter Studies

In multicenter or multi-institutional studies, participation by an institution does not automatically qualify every local investigator or participating staff member for authorship.

Authorship should be based on individual contribution and accountability.

Individuals involved primarily in recruitment, routine data collection, or administrative coordination may be acknowledged where their contribution does not satisfy full authorship requirements.

20. Artificial Intelligence and Authorship

Artificial intelligence systems, generative AI tools, large language models, automated writing systems, chatbots, and similar technologies must not be listed as authors or coauthors.

Such systems cannot:

  • accept responsibility for scholarly work;

  • approve the final manuscript;

  • provide informed consent to publication;

  • disclose conflicts of interest;

  • respond independently to research-integrity inquiries; or

  • assume legal or ethical accountability for published content.

Human authors remain fully responsible for all AI-assisted material included in a manuscript.

Substantive use of AI tools should be disclosed in accordance with the journal's AI Usage Policy where applicable.

21. Professional Medical or Scientific Writers

Professional writers, editors, translators, technical consultants, or medical-writing specialists should be listed as authors only if they independently satisfy the complete authorship criteria.

Where their contribution does not qualify for authorship, their assistance should be acknowledged where appropriate.

Financial support for professional writing or editorial assistance should be disclosed when relevant.

22. Contributors Who Are Not Authors

Individuals whose contributions do not satisfy authorship requirements may be acknowledged.

Examples include individuals who provided:

  • technical support;

  • statistical consultation of limited scope;

  • language editing;

  • administrative assistance;

  • laboratory support;

  • software support;

  • recruitment assistance;

  • access to facilities;

  • general academic advice; or

  • other valuable non-author contributions.

The journal recommends obtaining permission from individuals before naming them in acknowledgments because acknowledgment may imply endorsement of the work.

23. Funding Does Not Establish Authorship

Providing research funding, grants, institutional support, equipment, or publication expenses does not automatically qualify an individual or organization for authorship.

Funding relationships should instead be disclosed in an appropriate Funding Statement.

Where a funder has contributed intellectually to study design, analysis, interpretation, or manuscript preparation, that role should be disclosed transparently.

24. Changes in Authorship Before Acceptance

Requests to add, remove, or rearrange authors after initial submission should be made only for legitimate reasons.

The journal may require:

  • a written explanation;

  • confirmation from the corresponding author;

  • written agreement from all existing authors;

  • written agreement from the author being added or removed;

  • revised contribution statements; and

  • additional documentation where appropriate.

Editorial processing may be suspended while an authorship-change request is evaluated.

25. Addition of an Author

A request to add an author should explain:

  • why the individual was not included originally;

  • what contribution the individual made;

  • how the individual satisfies the authorship requirements; and

  • whether all authors agree to the change.

The journal may decline requests that appear to involve honorary, purchased, manipulated, or otherwise inappropriate authorship.

26. Removal of an Author

An individual should not be removed from the author list without appropriate justification.

The journal may require confirmation that the person being removed:

  • agrees to removal; or

  • did not legitimately qualify for authorship.

Where there is disagreement, the journal may suspend consideration and request that the relevant institutions resolve the dispute.

27. Changes in Authorship After Acceptance

Authorship changes requested after acceptance require increased scrutiny because the manuscript has already completed substantial editorial evaluation.

Such requests should be exceptional and supported by a clear explanation and agreement among the affected authors.

The journal may delay publication until the matter is resolved.

28. Changes After Publication

Changes to authorship after publication should not be made silently.

Where a legitimate authorship change is approved after publication, the journal may issue an appropriate correction notice linked to the published article.

The correction should preserve transparency regarding the publication record.

Serious cases involving authorship manipulation may require additional action under the journal's Research Misconduct Policy or Corrections and Retractions Policy.

29. Authorship Disputes

The journal seeks to facilitate transparent handling of authorship concerns but does not ordinarily determine complex contribution disputes that require access to institutional records or employment relationships.

Where authorship is disputed, the journal may:

  • request written statements from the parties;

  • request contribution information;

  • suspend editorial processing;

  • request institutional investigation; or

  • take appropriate action concerning the publication record.

Authors are strongly encouraged to resolve authorship and author-order issues within the research group before submission.

30. Institutional Role in Authorship Disputes

Where a dispute cannot be resolved through straightforward documentary evidence, the authors' institution or another appropriate research-integrity authority may be better positioned to investigate.

The journal may rely on a credible institutional determination when deciding whether changes to a submitted or published article are required.

The journal's responsibility is primarily to protect the accuracy of the scholarly record rather than adjudicate employment or personal disputes among researchers.

31. Deceased Authors

Where an author dies before manuscript submission, revision, acceptance, or publication, the editorial office should be informed.

A deceased contributor may remain listed as an author where the individual made an authorship-level contribution and had approved the work to the extent reasonably possible before death.

The remaining authors should take responsibility for ensuring that the work accurately represents the deceased author's contribution.

Relevant legal or consent considerations may be evaluated where necessary.

32. Incapacitated Authors

Where an author becomes unable to participate in final approval because of severe illness or another exceptional circumstance, the corresponding author should notify the editorial office.

The journal will evaluate such situations individually, considering the contributor's documented role, prior approval, accountability arrangements, and the integrity of the scholarly record.

33. Author Responsibility for Data

Authors involved in data acquisition, analysis, interpretation, or management should accurately describe their role.

At least one or more authors should have appropriate responsibility for the integrity and accessibility of the underlying research data where applicable.

Authors should not claim direct responsibility for datasets or analyses that they did not review or understand.

34. Author Responsibility for Statistical Analysis

Where complex statistical analysis substantially affects the findings, individuals responsible for the analysis should have appropriate methodological competence.

If a statistician or quantitative researcher meets the full authorship criteria, they should be recognized as an author.

If the contribution is limited to consultation or technical advice, acknowledgment may be more appropriate.

35. Author Responsibility for Software and Computational Work

Software developers, data scientists, machine-learning researchers, engineers, or computational specialists may qualify for authorship when their contribution is substantial and satisfies the complete authorship requirements.

Routine use of existing software, technical installation, or basic coding assistance alone does not automatically establish authorship.

Where custom software or algorithms materially underpin the findings, the relevant contributions should be described transparently.

36. Conflicts of Interest and Authorship

All authors should disclose relevant competing interests in accordance with the journal's Conflict of Interest Policy.

Authorship should not be used to conceal:

  • financial relationships;

  • commercial involvement;

  • institutional interests;

  • intellectual-property interests;

  • consultancy relationships; or

  • other relevant connections.

The contribution and role of commercial sponsors or technology providers should be disclosed accurately where applicable.

37. Editors as Authors

Manuscripts submitted by an Editor-in-Chief, editor, editorial-board member, or other individual involved in the journal's editorial activities must be handled independently of the author concerned.

The editor-author should have no role in:

  • reviewer selection;

  • peer-review management;

  • editorial assessment;

  • access to confidential reviewer information; or

  • the final publication decision.

An independent editor should manage the submission to protect editorial impartiality.

38. Reviewer Involvement and Authorship

Reviewers should not seek authorship on a manuscript they have been assigned to review.

If peer review identifies circumstances in which substantial new collaboration would be academically appropriate, the reviewer should first withdraw from the confidential review process and communicate with the editor before any independent collaboration is considered.

Confidential manuscript information must not be used to obtain authorship opportunities.

39. Authorship and Duplicate Submission

Every listed author should be aware of where the manuscript has been submitted.

Authors should not permit substantially the same manuscript to be simultaneously submitted to more than one journal.

The corresponding author is expected to communicate the submission status accurately to all coauthors.

40. False Authorship Information

Providing false or manipulated authorship information may constitute a research-integrity concern.

Examples include:

  • fabricated authors;

  • stolen researcher identities;

  • unauthorized use of another person's name;

  • false affiliations;

  • fabricated ORCID identifiers;

  • fraudulent email addresses;

  • purchased authorship positions; or

  • deliberate misrepresentation of contributions.

Where such concerns arise, editorial processing may be suspended while the matter is investigated.

41. Authorship Verification

The journal may request additional verification where authorship information appears inconsistent, incomplete, or potentially unreliable.

Verification may include:

  • institutional email confirmation;

  • ORCID verification;

  • contribution statements;

  • written author declarations;

  • confirmation from all coauthors; or

  • communication with relevant institutions.

Verification procedures should be applied proportionately and should not be used to discriminate against authors based on geography, institution, academic seniority, or professional status.

42. Acknowledgments

The Acknowledgments section may recognize individuals or organizations that contributed to the research but did not meet the requirements for authorship.

Acknowledged contributions may include:

  • technical assistance;

  • language support;

  • administrative assistance;

  • statistical consultation;

  • equipment access;

  • professional writing support;

  • laboratory assistance; or

  • other non-author contributions.

Individuals should ordinarily be informed before being named in acknowledgments.

43. Publication Responsibility

All authors share responsibility for protecting the accuracy and integrity of the published record.

If an author becomes aware of a material error or research-integrity concern after publication, the author should notify the journal promptly and cooperate with any appropriate correction, clarification, investigation, or retraction process.

Authorship responsibility continues after publication.

44. Relationship With Other Journal Policies

This Authorship Criteria policy should be read together with the journal's:

  • Publication Ethics Policy;

  • Research Misconduct Policy;

  • Conflict of Interest Policy;

  • AI Usage Policy;

  • Research Data Sharing Policy;

  • Data Availability Policy;

  • Peer Review Policy;

  • Corrections and Retractions Policy;

  • Retraction Policy; and

  • Complaints and Appeals Policy.

Where an authorship issue also involves suspected misconduct, the relevant research-integrity procedures may apply.

45. Responsibilities of the Corresponding Author

The corresponding author should take reasonable steps to ensure that:

  • all legitimate authors are included;

  • all authors approve the manuscript;

  • the author order is agreed;

  • affiliations are accurate;

  • contribution information is truthful;

  • declarations are complete;

  • funding is disclosed;

  • conflicts of interest are disclosed;

  • authors receive relevant editorial correspondence; and

  • post-publication concerns are communicated to coauthors.

The corresponding author does not have unilateral authority to add or remove authors without appropriate agreement and editorial approval.

46. Responsibilities of All Authors

Each author is responsible for:

  • accurately representing their contribution;

  • approving the manuscript;

  • providing truthful author information;

  • reviewing relevant declarations;

  • protecting participant and data confidentiality;

  • disclosing conflicts of interest;

  • responding to legitimate questions concerning their work;

  • cooperating with editorial inquiries; and

  • supporting correction of the scholarly record where necessary.

47. Editorial Responsibility

Editors are responsible for applying authorship procedures fairly and consistently.

Editors should not add or remove authors solely on the basis of personal judgment about contribution where a genuine dispute requires institutional investigation.

However, the journal may take necessary editorial action where reliable evidence establishes manipulated, false, or inappropriate authorship.

48. No Discrimination in Authorship Decisions

Authorship eligibility must not be determined by:

  • nationality;

  • ethnicity;

  • gender;

  • age;

  • institutional prestige;

  • academic seniority;

  • geographic location;

  • professional discipline;

  • financial status; or

  • ability to pay publication charges.

The same contribution and accountability standards apply to all authors.

Commitment to Transparent Authorship

The Digital Health & Telemonitoring Advances is committed to ensuring that authorship accurately reflects substantial scholarly contribution and appropriate responsibility for published work.

Clear authorship and contributorship practices protect legitimate academic credit, reduce disputes, strengthen accountability, and support confidence in the research record. Authors are therefore expected to discuss authorship early in the research process, document contributions where appropriate, resolve disagreements responsibly, and provide accurate authorship information throughout submission, review, publication, and post-publication stages.