ArticleInternational journal of health services : planning, administration, evaluation2003
Conflicts between commercial and scientific interests in pharmaceutical advertising for medical journals.
Article in International journal of health services : planning, administration, evaluation, 2003. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Relationships among commercial practices and author conflicts of interest in biomedical publishing.PloS one · 2020Article
- Article
- Does pharmaceutical advertising affect journal publication about dietary supplements?BMC complementary and alternative medicine · 2008Article
- Advertising in medical journals: should current practices change?PLoS medicine · 2006Article
- The corporate co-author, the ghostwriter, and the medical society: an object lesson (June, 2005 issue).Journal of general internal medicine · 2006Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
In 1992, researchers from the University of California, Los Angeles, published a study on the scientific merit and validity of pharmaceutical advertisements in medical journals. Their results led them to conclude, provocatively, that many pharmaceutical advertisements contained deficiencies in areas in which the U.S. Food and Drug Administration had established explicit standards of quality. This article provides a detailed account of third-party reactions to the study following its publication in the Annals of Internal Medicine, as well as the implications for those involved, including the authors, editors, and publisher. The increasingly diverging interests between medical journal editors and publishers are also discussed and highlighted by two recent cases of editors' departures from prominent general-interest medical journals.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.