Brain Tumor Institute Bioinformatics Core Authorship and Contributor Guideline

Applies To: All projects with BTI bioinformatics staff contributors

I. Purpose

The BTI Bioinformatics Core is committed to fair, transparent, and ethical attribution of scholarly contributions. This guideline exists to prevent intentional or inadvertent exclusion of contributors, including Core staff, students, and trainees, from scholarly credit.

II. Authorship Standard

This guideline follows the CNRI Authorship Policy CNMC:A:46, which adopted the current four-criterion standard of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) on July 1, 2026.

III. ICMJE Authorship Criteria

Authorship requires ALL four of the following:

1. Substantial contributions to conception/design or data acquisition, analysis, or interpretation; AND
2. Drafting the work or critically revising it for intellectual content; AND
3. Final approval of the version to be published; AND
4. Accountability for the accuracy and integrity of the entire work.

IV. Opportunity to Qualify for Authorship

The ICMJE criteria must not be used to exclude contributors by denying them the opportunity to draft, review, or approve manuscripts. Individuals meeting Criterion 1 must be offered a reasonable opportunity to meet Criteria 2 and 3.

V. Application to the BTI Bioinformatics Core

All Principal Investigators collaborating with the BTI Bioinformatics Core are expected to apply this guideline to all scholarly outputs, including abstracts, posters, oral presentations, preprints, manuscripts, patents, etc. When authorship is unclear, the PI should consult with the Core prior to submission.

VI. Contributor Roles (CRediT) and Acknowledgements

The BTI Bioinformatics Core will use the Contributor Role Taxonomy (CRediT) in publications to describe individual contributions. CRediT roles supplement, but do not replace, authorship determination under ICMJE criteria.

Contributions that do not meet ICMJE authorship criteria — including funding the study, providing staff support in kind, resource allocation, or general administrative support — should be recognized in the Acknowledgments section of the publication (see Appendix B for example language). Acknowledgment is distinct from authorship and does not carry the accountability obligations of Criterion 4. The PI is responsible for ensuring that all such contributions are appropriately acknowledged.

All publications arising from projects supported by the Brain Tumor Institute Bioinformatics Core should include the following funding acknowledgment:

This statement should appear in the Acknowledgments section of all applicable outputs, including manuscripts, preprints, posters, and abstracts where acknowledgment sections are permitted.

If a specific individual or grant provided salary support for a Core staff member's contribution to the project, that support should be acknowledged separately, in addition to the standard BTI funding statement above. For example:

VII. Principal Investigator Responsibility

The Principal Investigator is responsible for ensuring appropriate authorship and acknowledgment for all project outputs, including abstracts, posters, oral presentations, preprints, manuscripts, and/or patents. This responsibility includes oversight of their laboratory members.

VIII. Authorship Disputes and Resolution

The BTI Bioinformatics Core is committed to resolving authorship questions collaboratively and in good faith. If concerns arise at any stage of a project, the Core will work with the PI and relevant stakeholders to reach a fair resolution. This may include revisiting authorship assignments, requesting corrections prior to or after submission, or engaging departmental or institutional resources if needed. The goal of any resolution process is to ensure accurate attribution for all contributors.

IX. Pre-Submission Review by the BTI Bioinformatics Core

All scholarly outputs that include bioinformatics contributions should be shared with the BTI Bioinformatics Core Director (Dr. Jo Lynne Rokita), Assistant Director (Dr. Rehman Qureshi), Senior Program and Operations Manager (Ms. Bailey Farrow), and contributing staff prior to submission. We also request that the Core have adequate time to review for scientific accuracy, methodological integrity, and appropriate attribution. The PI is responsible for initiating this review.

* For manuscripts, the shorter review window applies only when BTI Bioinformatics Core staff actively participated in drafting the submitted text. Prior review of figures, methods sections, or earlier project outputs does not qualify. When in doubt, the 14-day window applies.

These are minimums — PIs should confirm Core staff availability well ahead of time-sensitive submissions.

The Core's review scope includes, but is not limited to:

• Accuracy of bioinformatics methods descriptions and statistical reporting
• Correct interpretation of computational results
• Appropriate representation of software, pipelines, and databases used
• Verification that authorship and CRediT attributions reflect actual contributions
• Adequacy of supplementary materials related to computational methods
• Accuracy of code and data availability section
• Reviewing acknowledgements and funding section

Data Deposition Timelines

Public repository accession numbers are often required for the data availability section prior to manuscript submission. PIs should plan for data deposition well in advance, as processing times vary by repository.

The PI must have an account with the repository and will add a Core user with access to perform the upload. The PI is responsible for filling out the repository's file metadata.

X. Bioinformatics Contribution Examples Satisfying ICMJE Criterion 1

The following are concrete examples of contributions that may constitute substantial contributions to conception, design, analysis, or interpretation for bioinformatics staff. These examples are illustrative, not exhaustive. Job title alone does not determine authorship eligibility — contributions are evaluated based on their intellectual substance, not the role of the person making them. Meeting Criterion 1 alone is not sufficient for authorship; contributors must also be given the opportunity to meet Criteria 2–4.

Bioinformatics Engineer

• Developing or substantially modifying pipelines, tools, or software integral to the study's data generation or analysis
• Designing the data architecture, storage, or processing strategy for study datasets
• Implementing quality control frameworks that directly shape which data are included in analysis
• Writing custom scripts or code used for primary data analysis, visualization, or statistical testing
• Optimizing or troubleshooting computational infrastructure in ways that materially affect analytical outcomes

Bioinformatics Scientist

• Designing or selecting the analytical framework or statistical approach for a study (e.g., choosing between differential expression methods, variant calling strategies, or dimensionality reduction approaches)
• Interpreting biological meaning from computational results in the context of the research question
• Identifying and resolving analytical confounds (e.g., batch effects, population stratification)
• Critically evaluating and selecting among competing tools or algorithms based on study-specific data characteristics
• Developing novel analysis workflows or adapting existing methods to address a specific scientific question

Code Review and Data Integrity Oversight

• Reviewing and approving code or analytical pipelines with substantive scientific or methodological input — for example, identifying flawed logic, recommending alternative approaches, or verifying that outputs are scientifically valid
• Oversight of data quality assurance processes where the reviewer makes or approves decisions that determine which data enter analysis
• Evaluating whether computational results are consistent with expected biological or technical behavior, and directing corrective action when they are not
• Establishing or enforcing data standards, validation criteria, or QC thresholds that materially affect what is reported in the study

Supervisory and Operations Roles

A supervisor, core director, or operations manager may satisfy Criterion 1 if they made specific intellectual contributions to study conception, design, analytical approach, data acquisition, or interpretation — not by virtue of their position alone.

• Directing scientific decision-making at key analytical junctures (e.g., determining how to handle failed samples, approving a change in analytical strategy mid-project)
• Negotiating or managing access to datasets, databases, or external resources that are integral to the study — where the acquisition itself required substantive scientific judgment
• Overseeing sample intake, data transfer, or data governance processes in ways that directly determine what data are available for analysis
• Providing expert judgment that resolves a scientific question or meaningfully shapes the study's conclusions
• Securing and allocating Core funding to support a project where the director maintains active scientific oversight of the work, including input into study conception, data acquisition strategy, or interpretation of results

Contributions That Typically Do Not Meet Criterion 1 Alone

• Running a standard, pre-established pipeline without scientific input into parameter selection or interpretation
• Administrative sign-off on work without substantive review of its scientific content
• Personnel management, staff assignment, or project scheduling unrelated to scientific content
• General IT or storage support not specific to the study's scientific questions
• Routine data transfer, format conversion, or file management without analytical involvement
• Generating summary statistics or QC reports without participation in their interpretation

Appendix A: Authorship Eligibility Checklist

Check each item prior to manuscript submission:

☐ All contributors with substantial intellectual contributions (including Core staff and trainees) have been identified.
☐ Each proposed author meets ICMJE Criterion 1.
☐ Eligible contributors were offered the opportunity to draft or critically review the manuscript.
☐ All proposed authors reviewed and approved the final version.
☐ All proposed authors agreed to accountability for the work.
☐ CRediT roles have been accurately assigned.
☐ The PI has reviewed and confirmed the final author list.
☐ The PI has included an acknowledgements statement acknowledging the Core.
☐ The PI has included a funding statement acknowledging the BTI anonymous investors.

Appendix B: Sample Acknowledgment Language

The following statements are provided as templates for acknowledging BTI Bioinformatics Core contributions that do not meet ICMJE authorship criteria, including staff support provided in kind. PIs should adapt this language to accurately reflect the nature of contributions in their specific project.