OPUS 12 Foundation                              
OPUS 12 Foundation Multi-Institutional Reviews - Rules of Participation
  1. Please contact the OPUS 12 Foundation to find out which current review project(s) need additional contributors. You will be matched with one of the reviews that are still available and you are willing to participate in. These projects deal with a variety of clinical and basic science topics and aim to 'crystallize' the existing knowledge on the respective topic(s).
  2. To qualify for authorship, at least two thirds of each contributor's assigned sections/portions of the review project will need to be completed by a pre-determined deadline. Less than that contribution will qualify for a mention in 'acknowledgments' of the respective manuscript. While we do not anticipate that this will be a problem, we plan to strictly adhere to this rule in order to prevent those participants who believe that the mere presence of an intention to engage in research constitutes a basis for authorship from receiving undue scientific credit.
  3. Up to two authors per institution (no exceptions).
  4. Each completed section means a 'polished product' not a 'rough draft' and such 'rough drafts' will be sent back to the respective author(s) and credit will not be given for that particular section until appropriate revisions have been made. If these revisions HAVE NOT been made and turned in a timely manner, then authorship rule #2 and #9 will be strictly applied and enforced. There will be no 'research freebies'.
  5. The OPUS 12 Foundation will need an advanced notice given by a pre-dermined deadline as to exactly how many sections you will be able to complete so that other study participants can 'pick up' any remaining manuscript sections and the overall progress of the manuscript is not delayed.
  6. Also, there will be an ABSOLUTE deadline for turning in the 'polished product' and any material that is inadequately prepared, i.e. 'rough draft', or any material that is physically delievered after the ABSOLUTE deadline will NOT be accepted, even if it means that the particular contributor WOULD NOT be a named author on the paper.
  7. There is also a WEEKLY REPORTING requirement - An update on each project participant's progress. These projects frequently involve 4-5 author teams and coordination is crucial. Without accurate coordination and occassional re-direction of review sections to other participants, deadlines will be missed.
  8. If you are not able, for any reason, meet the above points, please notify the OPUS 12 Foundation immediately, as the project CAN NOT be delayed.
  9. Please remember, the order of authorship is determined by the number (or percentage) of completed sections written by each author. Also note that the number of sections assigned to each author but NOT delivered (as defined above) DOES NOT COUNT toward authorship. For example, if you were assigned and volunteereed to contribute 10 out of 20 sections and you are the largest single contributor, you will be the first author. However, if you only deliver hastily prepared and/or unacceptable material (see sections #4 and #6), or if you only deliver 8 of the 10 assigned sections, the remaining 2 sections will be re-assigned to another participant and you may loose you position as the lead author. Also, based on section #6 of these rules, if the total number of delivered/acceptable sections is less than two thirds, your name will only appear in acknowledgments but not on the main authorship line.

OPUS 12 Foundation multi-disciplinary expert discussion panels

Participation in OPUS 12 Foundation's multi-disciplinary expert discussion panels is strictly by invitation. We seek to solicit the foremost experts in their respective disciplines and professions to share their opinions and knowledge on topics that affect the humanity. Resources-permitting, the OPUS 12 Foundation may be able to accomodate audiences at these discussion panels.