ArticleJournal of medical ethics2004
Biomedical conflicts of interest: a defence of the sequestration thesis-learning from the cases of Nancy Olivieri and David Healy.
Article in Journal of medical ethics, 2004. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
25 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Attitudes of academic and clinical researchers toward financial ties in research: a systematic review.Science and engineering ethics · 2005Pooled it
- The nature and influence of pharmaceutical industry involvement in asthma trials.Canadian respiratory journalPooled it
- A portrait of commissioned literature: connecting the dots between medical education and communication companies, authors, funders and publishers.Research integrity and peer review · 2026Article
- Objectivity for the research worker.European journal for philosophy of science · 2021Article
- Financial Conflicts of Interest are of Higher Ethical Priority than "Intellectual" Conflicts of Interest.Journal of bioethical inquiry · 2020Article
- Disclosure is Inadequate as a Solution to Managing Conflicts of Interest in Human Research.Journal of bioethical inquiry · 2018Article
- Can a good tree bring forth evil fruit? The funding of medical research by industry.British medical bulletin · 2016Review
- Teaching Conflict: Professionalism and Medical Education.Journal of bioethical inquiry · 2015Article
- Freedom of Science - Can Industry Influence What Scientists Publish?European endocrinology · 2014Article
- Of mugs, meals and more: the intricate relations between physicians and the medical industry.Medicine, health care, and philosophy · 2013Article
- Those who have the gold make the evidence: how the pharmaceutical industry biases the outcomes of clinical trials of medications.Science and engineering ethics · 2012Article
- Unbalanced reporting of benefits and harms in abstracts on rofecoxib.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2010Article
- Safety in human research: past problems and current challenges from a Canadian perspective.HEC forum : an interdisciplinary journal on hospitals' ethical and legal issues · 2008Article
- A reply to Thomas Stossel on the AMA-CEJA draft report.Medscape journal of medicine · 2008Article
- Biomedical research and corporate interests: a question of academic freedom.Mens sana monographs · 2008Article
- Protecting academic freedom.Open medicine : a peer-reviewed, independent, open-access journal · 2008Article
- Ghost management: how much of the medical literature is shaped behind the scenes by the pharmaceutical industry?PLoS medicine · 2007Review
- Concerned Journals, Editors And ICMJE.Mens sana monographs · 2007Article
- Educating health professionals about drug and device promotion: advocates' recommendations.PLoS medicine · 2006Article
- The connection between academia and industry.Mens sana monographs · 2005Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
No discussion of academic freedom, research integrity, and patient safety could begin with a more disquieting pair of case studies than those of Nancy Olivieri and David Healy. The cumulative impact of the Olivieri and Healy affairs has caused serious self examination within the biomedical research community. The first part of the essay analyses these recent academic scandals. The two case studies are then placed in their historical context-that context being the transformation of the norms of science through increasingly close ties between research universities and the corporate world. After a literature survey of the ways in which corporate sponsorship has biased the results of clinical drug trials, two different strategies to mitigate this problem are identified and assessed: a regulatory approach, which focuses on managing risks associated with industry funding of university research, and a more radical approach, the sequestration thesis, which counsels the outright elimination of corporate sponsorship. The reformist approach is criticised and the radical approach defended.
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.