ArticleBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2012
High reprint orders in medical journals and pharmaceutical industry funding: case-control study.
Article in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Conflicts of interest in clinical practice: lessons learned from cardiovascular medicine.European journal of cardio-thoracic surgery : official journal of the European Association for Cardio-thoracic Surgery · 2024Review
- Article
- Relationships among commercial practices and author conflicts of interest in biomedical publishing.PloS one · 2020Article
- Article
- Article
- The Mass Production of Redundant, Misleading, and Conflicted Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses.The Milbank quarterly · 2016Article
- The ICMJE Recommendations and pharmaceutical marketing--strengths, weaknesses and the unsolved problem of attribution in publication ethics.BMC medical ethics · 2016Article
- Number of citations 1 year after publication of trial results and their relation to medicines regulatory approval.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2016Article
- Role of editorial and peer review processes in publication bias: analysis of drug trials submitted to eight medical journals.PloS one · 2014Article
- Differences in the volume of pharmaceutical advertisements between print general medical journals.PloS one · 2014Article
- Which placebo to cure depression? A thought-provoking network meta-analysis.BMC medicine · 2013Article
- Poor health in rich countries: a role for open access journals.PLoS medicine · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo assess the extent to which funding and study design are associated with high reprint orders.
designCase-control study.
settingTop articles by size of reprint orders in seven journals, 2002-09.
participantsLancet, Lancet Neurology, Lancet Oncology (Lancet Group), BMJ, Gut, Heart, and Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery & Psychiatry (BMJ Group) matched to contemporaneous articles not in the list of high reprint orders.
main outcome measuresFunding and design of randomised controlled trials or other study designs.
resultsMedian reprint orders for the seven journals ranged from 3000 to 126,350. Papers with high reprint orders were more likely to be funded by the pharmaceutical industry than were control papers (industry funding versus other or none: odds ratio 8.64, 95% confidence interval 5.09 to 14.68, and mixed funding versus other or none: 3.72, 2.43 to 5.70).
conclusionsFunding by the pharmaceutical industry is associated with high numbers of reprint orders.
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.