Media coverage of conflicts of interest in science

Science Communication

Volumn 24, Issue 4, 2003, Pages 395-419

  McComas, Katherine A ^a   Simone, Leah M ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND   (United States)

Author keywords

Bias; Conflict of interest; Content analysis; Credibility; Media

Indexed keywords

EID: 0038270746     PISSN: 10755470     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1075547003024004001     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. Angell, M. 2001. Medicine in the noise age: What can we believe? Accountability in Research 8:189-95.
2. Audit Bureau of Circulations. 2002. Top 100 newspapers by largest reported circulation. Retrieved 2 January 2003 from http://www.accessabc.com/reader/top100.htm.
3. Barnes, D. E., and L.A. Bero. 1996. Industry-funded research and conflict of interest: An analysis of research sponsored by the tobacco industry through the Center for Indoor Air Research. Journal of Health Politics, Policy, and Law 21:515-42.
4. Boffey, P. M., J. E. Rodgers, and S. H. Schneider. 1999. Interpreting uncertainty: A panel discussion. In Communicating uncertainty: Media coverage of new and controversial science, edited by S. M. Friedman, S. Dunwoody, and C. L. Rogers, 81-91. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
5. Boyd, E. A., and L. A. Bero. 2000. Assessing faculty financial relationships with industry: A case study. Journal of the American Medical Association 284:2203-8.
6. Brown, D. 2000. Scientists report bid to block publication of an AIDS study; Results not favorable to biotech firm's antiviral product. Washington Post 1 November:A10.
7. Cauchon, D. 2000. FDA advisers tied to industry. USA Today 25 September: 1A.
8. Cech, T. R., and J. S. Leonard. 2001. Conflicts of interest - Moving beyond disclosure. Science 291:989.
9. Cohen, J. J. 2001. Trust us to make a difference: Ensuring public confidence in the integrity of clinical research. Academic Medicine 76:209-214.
10. Colglazier, E. W. 2000, October 6. Letter from Dr. E. William Colglazier, National Academy of Sciences, to Ronald Collins. Retrieved 13 August 2002 from http://www.cspinet.org/integrity/colglazier.html.
11. Davis, M. 2001. Introduction. In Conflict of interest in the professions, edited by M. Davis and A. Stark, 3-19. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
12. DeAngelis, C. D. 2000. Conflict of interest and the public trust. Journal of the American Medical Association 284:2237-2238.
13. Doyle, L. 1994. Drinks companies pay dons to rubbish alcohol report. The Independent 4 December:00.
14. 18 U.S.C. 1948, Pub. L. No. 87-849, § 208, 1962.
15. Entman, R. M. 1993. Framing: Toward a clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication 43:51-58.
16. Ethics Reform Act of 1989, Pub. L. No. 101-194.
17. FDA. 2002, Draft guidance on disclosure of conflicts of interest for special government employees participating in FDA product specific advisory committees. Retrieved 12 March 2002 from http://www.fda.gov/oc/guidance/advisorycommittee.html.
18. Herron, K. G., and H. C. Jenkins-Smith. 1998. Public perspectives on nuclear security. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Institute for Public Policy.
19. Hilts, P. 2000. Company tried to block report that its HIV vaccine failed. New York Times 1 November:A26.
20. Holden, C. 2000. NEJM admits breaking its own tough rules. Science 287:1573-75.
21. Horton, R. 1997. Conflict of interest in clinical research: Opprobrium or obsessions? The Lancet 349:1112-13.
22. Hwang, N., and R. Haas. 2000. Regulators must be unconflicted. National Law Journal 18 September: A21.
23. International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. 1993. Conflict of interest. The Lancet 341:742-43
24. Jasanoff, S. 1990. The fifth branch: Science advisors as policymakers. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
25. Kaid, L. L., and A.J. Wadsworth. 1989. Content analysis. In Measurement of communication behavior, edited by P. Emmert and L. L. Baker, 197-215. White Plains, NY: Longman.
26. Krimsky, S., L. S. Rothenberg, P. Stott, and G. Kyle. 1998. Scientific journals and their authors' financial interests: A pilot study. Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics 67:194-201.
27. Latham, S. R. 2001. Conflict of interest in medical practice. In Conflict of interest in the professions, edited by M. Davis and A. Stark, 279-301. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
28. McCombs, M., and T. Bell. 1996. The agenda-setting role of mass communication. In An integrated approach to communication theory and research, edited by M. B. Salwen and D. W. Stacks, 93-100. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
29. McNutt, K. 1999. Conflict of inerest. Journal of the American Dietetic Association 99:29-30.
30. Moynihan, R., L. Bero, D. Ross-Degnan, D. Henry, K. Lee, J. Watkins, C. Mah, and S. B. Soumerai. 2000. Coverage by the news media of the benefits and risks of medications. New England Journal of Medicine 342:1645-50.
31. National Science Board. 2000. Science and engineering indicators - 2000 (NSB-00-1). Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation.
32. Nelkin, D. 1987. Selling science: How the press covers science and technology. New York: W. H. Freeman.
33. Rampton, S., and J. Stauber. 2001. Trust us, we're experts: How industry manipulates science and gambles with your future. New York: Jeremy P. Tarcher/Putnam.
34. Rock, C. L. 1999. Conflict of interest: An important issue in nutrition research and communications. Journal of the American Dietetic Association 99:31-32.
35. Rothman, K. J. 1993. Conflict of interest: The new McCarthyism in science. Journal of the American Medical Association 269:2782-84.
36. Rotton, J., P. W. Foos, L. VanMeek, and M. Levitt. 1995. Publication practices and the file drawer problem: A survey of published authors. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality 10:1-13.
37. Scott, W. A. 1955. Reliability of content analysis: The case of nominal scale coding. Public Opinion Quarterly 19:321-25.
38. Shuchman, M., and M. S. Wilkes. 1997. Medical scientists and health news reporting: A case of miscommunication. Annals of Internal Medicine 126:976-82.
39. Singletary, M. 1994. Mass communication research: Contemporary methods and applications. White Plains, NY: Longman.
40. Smith, R. 1994. Questioning academic integrity. British Medical Journal 309:1597-98.
41. Spence, J. C., and C. Blanchard. 2001. Publication bias in sport and exercise psychology: The games we play. International Journal of Sport Psychology 32:386-99.
42. Stempel, G. 1981. Content analysis. In Research methods in mass communication, edited by G. H. Stempel and B. H. Westley, 119-31. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
43. Stolberg, S. G. 2000. Teenager's death is shaking up field of human gene-therapy. New York Times 27 January:A20.
44. Vedantam, S. 2002. Fusion experiment sparks an academic brawl. Washington Post 11 March:A10.
45. Wimmer, R. D., and J. R. Dominick. 1997. Mass media research. 5th ed. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.