Abstract
Large author groups can reflect legitimate collaboration, but author counts alone reveal little about individual contributions or accountability. Three recent articles in World Journal of Men’s Health illustrate the range: an editorial on authorship accountability lists 18 authors; a systematic review and meta-analysis that included five studies lists 28; and an international survey by Shah and colleagues lists nearly 200 named authors. These figures do not establish inappropriate authorship. They do raise a question: how can readers distinguish substantive authorship from other valuable contributions? We propose proportionate reporting requirements that increase with the size and structure of a collaboration, including specific individual contribution statements and, for very large groups, an account of how final manuscript approval and accountability were secured. Greater transparency would help readers interpret academic credit without imposing arbitrary limits on author numbers.