Sadly, I think the CRediT taxonomy is being misused. Anyone can just make stuff up about paper contributions. Here we have an article where 5 authors were credited with "visualisation" in a paper with no figures. pubpeer.com/publications...
There are comments on PubPeer for publication: Associations Between Body Mass Index, Movement Behaviors, Motor Skills, Inhibition and Visuospatial Working Memory in Preschool Children: A Cross-Section...
10 years since CRediT was introduced, >20% adoption (of full text in Dimensions). Now, we need to build on this to comprehensively integrate CRediT in metadata and make sure the taxonomy evolves to remain fit for purpose. doi.org/10.1038/d415...
W/ @sjcporter.bsky.social Liz Allen Ruth Whitman
Information about the roles of each author of a paper can help to build trust, integrity and responsible research assessment. Coordinated efforts are needed to consolidate progress.
