[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"doc-seo-444992-105":3,"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":80,"doc-detail-444992-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"ok",{"site_id":7,"language":8,"slug":9,"title":10,"keywords":11,"description":12,"schema_data":13,"social_meta":73,"head_meta":75,"extra_data":77,"updated_unix":79},105,"en","attribution-of-credit-in-acknowledgements-the-case-of-systematic-reviews-in-medicine","Attribution of credit in acknowledgements: The case of systematic reviews in medicine","","Scientific research increasingly benefits from non-author contributors who perform valuable work but do not meet authorship criteria. Their support becomes visible only when recorded in acknowledgement texts, affecting transparency and fair credit. While authorship has been studied, acknowledgements have been largely overlooked. This study examines whether acknowledgements omit deserving contributors and whether omissions vary by gender and race in medical Cochrane systematic reviews, finding substantial non-acknowledgement and racial disparities linked to geography.",{"@graph":14,"@context":72},[15,34,55],{"@type":16,"itemListElement":17},"BreadcrumbList",[18,23,27,31],{"item":19,"name":20,"@type":21,"position":22},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",1,{"item":24,"name":25,"@type":21,"position":26},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/","Document",2,{"item":28,"name":29,"@type":21,"position":30},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/healthcare/","Healthcare",3,{"item":32,"name":10,"@type":21,"position":33},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/attribution-of-credit-in-acknowledgements-the-case-of-systematic-reviews-in-medicine/444992/",4,{"url":32,"name":10,"@type":35,"image":36,"author":41,"headline":10,"publisher":44,"fileFormat":47,"inLanguage":8,"description":12,"dateModified":48,"datePublished":49,"encodingFormat":47,"isAccessibleForFree":50,"interactionStatistic":51},"DigitalDocument",{"url":37,"@type":38,"width":39,"height":40},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/attribution-of-credit-in-acknowledgements-the-case-of-systematic-reviews-in-medicine/444992.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":42,"@type":43},"kopisore","Person",{"url":19,"name":45,"@type":46},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-04","2026-09-29",true,{"@type":52,"interactionType":53,"userInteractionCount":22},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":54},"ViewAction",{"@type":56,"mainEntity":57},"FAQPage",[58,64,68],{"name":59,"@type":60,"acceptedAnswer":61},"What issue does the study address about acknowledgements?","Question",{"text":62,"@type":63},"It examines whether non-author contributors receive appropriate credit in acknowledgement texts, despite doing valuable work that does not meet authorship criteria.","Answer",{"name":65,"@type":60,"acceptedAnswer":66},"What do the authors find about omission rates?",{"text":67,"@type":63},"Up to 40% of eligible Cochrane systematic reviews in their sample did not appropriately acknowledge non-author contributors.",{"name":69,"@type":60,"acceptedAnswer":70},"What explains the observed racial disparities?",{"text":71,"@type":63},"The disparity is driven by geographical differences: non-White contributors are more likely to be deprived of due acknowledgements in reviews from Asia, South America, and Africa.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":32,"og:type":74,"og:title":10,"og:site_name":45,"og:description":12},"article",{"robots":76,"canonical":32},"index,follow",{"doc_id":78,"site_id":7},444992,1791130782,{"code":4,"msg":81,"data":82},"success",[83,87,91,95,100,105,109,114,119,122,126],{"id":22,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":84,"show_sort_weight":85,"slug":86},"Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":26,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":88,"show_sort_weight":89,"slug":90},"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":33,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":92,"show_sort_weight":93,"slug":94},"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":96,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":97,"show_sort_weight":98,"slug":99},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":101,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":102,"show_sort_weight":103,"slug":104},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":106,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":29,"show_sort_weight":107,"slug":108},7,40,"healthcare",{"id":110,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":111,"show_sort_weight":112,"slug":113},8,"Research & Report",30,"research-report",{"id":115,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":116,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":118},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":117,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":120,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":121},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":123,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":124,"show_sort_weight":123,"slug":125},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":127,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":128,"show_sort_weight":96,"slug":129},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":81,"data":131},{"doc_id":78,"user_id":132,"nickname":42,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":106,"category_name":29,"doc_title":10,"doc_description":12,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":22,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":22,"is_downloadable":22,"audit_status":22,"page_count":139,"language":140,"language_code":8,"site_id":7,"html_lang":8,"table_of_contents":141,"faqs":142,"seo_title":143,"seo_description":12,"update_tm":144,"read_time":145},962090880963,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_6f874abed73319feea01a86fa6f0fab8","OPEN ACCESS  \nCitation: Salandra R, Miraldo M, Criscuolo P (2026) Attribution of credit in acknowledgements: The case of systematic reviews in medicine. PLoS One 21(1):  \ne0338714. [https://doi.org/10.1371/journal](https://doi.org/10.1371/journal). pone.0338714  \nEditor: Adrian A. Diaz-Faes, Ingenio CSIC-UPV, SPAIN  \nReceived: June 6, 2025  \nAccepted: November 26, 2025  \nPublished: January 6, 2026  \nPeer Review History: PLOS recognizes the benefits of transparency in the peer review process; therefore, we enable the publication of all of the content of peer review and author responses alongside final, published articles. The editorial history of this article is available here: [https://doi.org/10.1371/journal](https://doi.org/10.1371/journal). pone.0338714  \nCopyright: © 2026 Salandra et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution,  \nRESEARCH ARTICLE  \nAttribution of credit in acknowledgements: The case of systematic reviews in medicine  \nRossella Salandra1*, Marisa Miraldo2, Paola Criscuolo3  \n1 Strategy & Organisation Division, School of Management, University of Bath, Bath, United Kingdom, 2 Department of Economics & Public Policy and Centre for Health Economics & Policy Innovation, Imperial College Business School, London, United Kingdom, 3 Department of Management & Entrepreneurship, Imperial College Business School, London, United Kingdom  \n* [r.salandra@bath.ac.uk](r.salandra@bath.ac.uk)  \nAbstract  \nScientific research increasingly benefits from the work of non-author contributors, who engage in valuable activities but do not meet authorship criteria. The support of these contributors remains invisible unless it is recorded in acknowledgement texts, which has implications for research transparency and fair attribution of credit. While much research has examined authorship, acknowledgements have been largely neglected. We explore whether acknowledgements omit deserving contributors and the heterogeneity of omissions by gender and race. We focus on the medical field, which is often a forerunner in terms of attribution of credit, and consider acknowledgements in Cochrane systematic reviews. These reviews are governed by unique guidance that allows us to determine whether a contributor receives due credit. We find that as many as 40% of the eligible reviews in our sample (those that should have acknowledged prior authors) did not appropriately acknowledge non-author contributors. Non-White contributors were more likely to be missing from the acknowledgements. This disparity cannot be explained by non-White contributors being more likely to perform minor/technical review tasks or being in predominantly White research teams or teams led by White scientists. Instead, the effect is driven by geographical disparities, with non-White contributors being more likely to be deprived of due acknowledgements in reviews from Asia, South America and Africa. Furthermore, in most cases, all contributors were omitted from the acknowledgements, rather than specific contributors being excluded alone. Taken together, we provide novel evidence of some racial disparities in credit attribution in acknowledgements. Reassuringly, these appear to be driven by poor acknowledgement practice and geographical disparities rather than targeted exclusion.  \nIntroduction  \nAcknowledgements are a form of academic recognition included in the ‘reward triangle’ alongside authorship and citations [ 1] . Among the elements of this triangle,  \nPLOS One | [https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0338714](https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0338714) January 6, 2026 1 / 22  \nand reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.  \nData availability statement: The data underlying the results presented in the study are available from the University of Bath Research Data Archive: [https://doi.org/10.15125/BATH-01609](https://doi.org/","cbCaimoFh94PvVzO","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaimoFh94PvVzO","pdf",1135438,22,"English","# Abstract\n# Introduction\n## Academic recognition and the reward triangle\n## Purpose and research motivation","[{\"question\":\"What issue does the study address about acknowledgements?\",\"answer\":\"It examines whether non-author contributors receive appropriate credit in acknowledgement texts, despite doing valuable work that does not meet authorship criteria.\"},{\"question\":\"What do the authors find about omission rates?\",\"answer\":\"Up to 40% of eligible Cochrane systematic reviews in their sample did not appropriately acknowledge non-author contributors.\"},{\"question\":\"What explains the observed racial disparities?\",\"answer\":\"The disparity is driven by geographical differences: non-White contributors are more likely to be deprived of due acknowledgements in reviews from Asia, South America, and Africa.\"}]","Attribution of credit in acknowledgements: The case of systematic reviews in medicine | PDF",1790709992,55]