Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24345908›Full record

ArticleBrazilian journal of medical and biological research = Revista brasileira de pesquisas medicas e biologica2013

Addressing conflicts of interest in the research paper: a societal demand in contemporary science?

S M R Vasconcelos, M C Cassimiro, M F M Martins, M Palácios

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Brazilian journal of medical and biological research = Revista brasileira de pesquisas medicas e biologica, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

S M R VasconcelosUniversidade Federal de Rio de Janeiro, Instituto de Bioquímica Médica Leopoldo de Meis, Gestão e Difusão em Biociências, Programa de Educação, Rio de JaneiroRJ, Brasil.
M C CassimiroFundação Oswaldo Cruz/Instituto Oswaldo Cruz, Rio de JaneiroRJ, Brasil.
M F M MartinsFundação Oswaldo Cruz/Instituto de Comunicação e Informação Tecnológica em Saúde, Rio de JaneiroRJ, Brasil.
M PaláciosUniversidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, Instituto de Estudos em Saúde Coletiva, Rio de JaneiroRJ, Brasil.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In the last decade, dialogue between science and society has found a forum in an increasing number of publications on topics such as public engagement with science and public trust in science. Concerning the latter, issues that include cases of research misconduct, accountability in research, and conflicts of interest (COIs) have shaped global discussions on the communication of science. In the publication setting, the perception that hiding COIs and/or not managing them well may affect public trust in the research record has grown among editors. We conducted a search for editorials addressing COIs between 1989 and 2011, using four major databases: Medline/PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Knowledge. We explored the content of these editorials and the relationship they established between COIs and the public trust in science. Our results demonstrate that the relationship between disclosure of COIs and public trust in science has become a major concern among editors. We, thus, argue that COIs should be discussed more openly and frequently in graduate courses in the sciences, around the globe, not only in biomedical but also in non-biomedical areas. This is a critical issue in contemporary science, as graduate students are the future voices and decision-makers of the research community. Therefore, COIs, especially in the broader context of science and society, merit closer attention from policymakers, researchers, and educators. At times of great expectations for public engagement with science, mishandling of COIs may have undesirable consequences for public engagement with science and confidence in the scientific endeavor.

Identifiers

PMID24345908
PMCPMC3935271

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.