Literature DB >> 18299169

How pharmaceutical industry funding affects trial outcomes: causal structures and responses.

Sergio Sismondo1.   

Abstract

Three recent systematic reviews have shown that pharmaceutical industry funding of clinical trials is strongly associated with pro-industry results. This article builds on those analyses, situating funding's effects in the context of the ghost-management of research and publication by pharmaceutical companies, and the creation of social ties between those companies and researchers. There are multiple demonstrated causes of the association of funding and results, ranging from trial design bias to publication bias; these are all rooted in close contact between pharmaceutical companies and much clinical research. Given these points, most proposed measures to respond to this bias are too piecemeal to be adequate.

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18299169     DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2008.01.010

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Soc Sci Med        ISSN: 0277-9536            Impact factor:   4.634


  37 in total

1.  The need for a transparent, ethical, and successful relationship between academic scientists and the pharmaceutical industry: a view of the Group for the Respect of Ethics and Excellence in Science (GREES).

Authors:  O Bruyere; J A Kanis; M-E Ibar-Abadie; N Alsayed; M L Brandi; N Burlet; D L Cahall; A Chines; J-P Devogelaer; W Dere; N Goel; N Hughes; J-M Kaufman; S Korte; B H Mitlak; D Niese; R Rizzoli; L C Rovati; J-Y Reginster
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2010-03-18       Impact factor: 4.507

2.  Guests and ghosts begone-guest authorship and ghostwriting and the Journal of Clinical Sleep Medicine.

Authors:  Stuart F Quan
Journal:  J Clin Sleep Med       Date:  2008-06-15       Impact factor: 4.062

3.  Industry sponsorship and research outcome: systematic review with meta-analysis.

Authors:  Andreas Lundh; Joel Lexchin; Barbara Mintzes; Jeppe B Schroll; Lisa Bero
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2018-08-21       Impact factor: 17.440

4.  Commentary 1: How Should Community Members be Paid when they Go Off Script?

Authors:  Stuart Rennie
Journal:  J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics       Date:  2019-12       Impact factor: 1.742

5.  Ethics and technology transfer: patients, patents, and public trust.

Authors:  Deborah Zucker
Journal:  J Investig Med       Date:  2011-06       Impact factor: 2.895

Review 6.  Human recombinant protein C for severe sepsis and septic shock in adult and paediatric patients.

Authors:  Arturo J Martí-Carvajal; Ivan Solà; Christian Gluud; Dimitrios Lathyris; Andrés Felipe Cardona
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2012-12-12

7.  Financial Conflicts of Interest and Stance on Tobacco Harm Reduction: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Yogi H Hendlin; Manali Vora; Jesse Elias; Pamela M Ling
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2019-05-16       Impact factor: 9.308

8.  Those who have the gold make the evidence: how the pharmaceutical industry biases the outcomes of clinical trials of medications.

Authors:  Joel Lexchin
Journal:  Sci Eng Ethics       Date:  2011-02-15       Impact factor: 3.525

9.  Media coverage of drug regulatory agencies' safety advisories: A case study of citalopram and denosumab.

Authors:  Alice Fabbri; Mary O'Keeffe; Ray Moynihan; Mathias Møllebaek; Annim Mohammad; Alice Bhasale; Lorri Puil; Barbara Mintzes
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2020-03-20       Impact factor: 4.335

10.  The Influence of Disclosure and Ethics Education on Perceptions of Financial Conflicts of Interest.

Authors:  Donald F Sacco; Samuel V Bruton; Alen Hajnal; Chris J N Lustgraaf
Journal:  Sci Eng Ethics       Date:  2014-07-10       Impact factor: 3.525

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.