Study proposal submission form

The iCARE Group wishes to encourage further research in the area of capsule endoscopy in Europe. Proposals will be reviewed by three members of the iCARE Group Scientific Committee. The aim is to provide researchers expedited access to the iCARE Group experts' opinion and data. All rights to proprietary data will be observed and acknowledged.

Rules of publication and authorship of the work carried out by the international Capsule Endoscopy REsearch (iCARE) Group

Initiated by Xavier DRAY and Anastasios KOULAOUZIDIS on December 13th 2020. First presentation to iCARE founder members on February 1st, 2022. Approved by iCARE Board Members and Scientific Committee members on October 9th, 2022.

  1. The main principle for iCARE group publication's policy is to give recognition to all study participants according to the detailed rules below.
  2. All work initiated and/or carried out by the iCARE, and only this work, must indicate "on behalf of the iCARE study name group" after the last author’s name. When the iCARE has been asked to participate in a study conducted by an outside laboratory or team, the name of the iCARE group should not appear in the signatures.
  3. The team that initiates a study (A-team) is responsible for:
    (a) writing and presenting the abstract, and,
    (b) writing and finalising the paper to a submission-ready document.
    ▪︎ If the above term is fulfilled, the A-team has the right of first authorship. If the work has been entrusted to a younger colleague (e.g. a resident, fellow, assistant professor, etc.) supervised by a senior member of the A-team, then the younger colleague will appear first in the authors’ list and the senior member of the A-team will be in the last place (i.e. that of the guarantor of the work).
    ▪︎ If the work presented does not involve a younger colleague, the senior member of the A-team has the first place in the authors’ list, the last place goes to the iCARE group member who has been involved in the study in a constant and uncontested manner and remains happy to accept the responsibility of being a guarantor of the work.
    ▪︎ For clinical studies, A-team should include a minimal number of patients from their own centre.
  4. The teams that provided methods and/or results from application of technical methods (like robotics, A.I., advanced statistics) on clinical data (teams B, C, etc.) occupy the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, etc. and/or last 2nd, 3rd last place in the authors’ list (or co-authorship for 1st ranks), according to the degree of their involvement in the development and/or the application of these methods, as they can be quantified by the number of methods and results.
  5. The teams that provided clinical data occupy the next places in the authors’ list, according to the total number of data included in the work, with teams providing more data, ranked first; if equal in number, then according to the date of inclusion of the 1st dataset. Such teams can only be included in the authors’ list on the condition of having included a minimum proportion of patients, according to the Journal rules to which the article is submitted. This should be considered by all involved to avoid disappointments at the time of authorship list preparation.
  6. If, exceptionally and in a manner evident to all, 2 teams have jointly initiated the study (teams A and B), these two teams will share the 1st and last authorship, respectively. Caution is advised when involving a younger colleague in this type of work unless the senior member of a team agrees to leave the 1st author place and appear in the second last senior authorship place.
  7. The total number of authors of each work should be adjusted to the maximum number allowed by the targeted Journal. Teams that have included a small proportion of patients will have either one author included in the authors’ list (if the maximum number allowed is not reached) or all relevant contributors under the iCARE banner. If the number of contributors exceed the maximum number of authors allowed by the Journal:
    ▪︎ In the case of a submission to a journal that does accept the banner, then all additional contributors should appear as collaborators (in addition to the main author list).
    ▪︎ In the case of a submission to a journal that doesn’t accept the banner of contributors, then all additional contributors should appear in the acknowledgement list (in addition to the main author list).
  8. If one or more external expert collaborators are called upon (e.g. geneticist for polyposis; image analysis expert for work with artificial intelligence; statistical expert, other than one of the members of the iCARE, etc.), the place of the experts depends on their degree of involvement in the study.
    (a) in the case of primordial involvement of the expert (e.g. development of an index by a statistician, etc.), or very strong involvement (meta-analysis, etc.), that expert is placed in the penultimate position;
    (b) in the case of medium involvement of the expert (has done work that is limited in time but significant), that expert is placed in the third last position;
    (c) in the case of weak involvement of the expert (advice, intervention within the framework of his normal activity), that expert is mentioned in the acknowledgment. Parallel publication in the journal of the speciality (e.g. a genetics journal) is strongly encouraged if the expert feels that his or her involvement is not sufficiently recognised, and it is then up to him or her to decide the order of signatures.
  9. There should be one author per team, the young or senior person with the first signature being excluded from this count. However, if only one team (including A) has included a significant proportion of patients (to be determined specifically for each study), it may have another author which is placed according to the number of patients included by the team divided by two.
  10. In case of failure of the younger colleague and/or the senior who supports him/her in drafting and providing the manuscript within reasonable time, the younger author may be demoted beyond the 4th place, and the senior is placed according to the proportion of patients/cases included (rule 5), with the last (guarantor) place going to the iCARE member who takes charge of the drafting, finishing and presenting the manuscript.
  11. There is the possibility for the 1st/2nd and penultimate/last place to indicate "equal contributors", but this wording must be used in an exceptional and justified manner.
  12. Authorship for abstracts are subject to the same rules. However, the number of authors should be limited as far as necessary, giving preference to a rotation system if several abstracts on the same work are presented (in different meetings etc). When transforming to full articles, the number, place and content of authorship are reassessed when the article is finally drafted in accordance with the preceding rules (nos. 1 to 11). Acceptance of an abstract does not automatically imply the same authors and/or the same order in the article.
  13. The authorship rules also apply to internal ancillary studies carried out on the basis of data collected within the framework of an iCARE study. The team conducting the ancillary study is then becoming team A, or teams A and B (if equivalent collaboration), the other teams being downgraded by one or two places, respectively.
  14. In the event of a dispute over authorship, the final decision is with the members of the Scientific Committee of iCARE.