A review of conflict of interest, competing interest, and bias for toxicologists

Toxicology and Industrial Health

Volumn 23, Issue 10, 2007, Pages 557-571

  Claxton, Ld ^a  

^a U S ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY   (United States)

Author keywords

academia; bias; competing interest; conflict of interest; editors; ethics; government; industry; journals; law; non profit organizations; scientific societies; toxicology

Indexed keywords

CONFLICT OF INTEREST; DECISION MAKING; HEALTH CARE; HEALTH CARE ORGANIZATION; MEDICAL LITERATURE; MEDICAL RESEARCH; MEDICAL SOCIETY; PROFESSIONALISM; REVIEW; SCIENTIFIC MISCONDUCT; WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION;

BIAS (EPIDEMIOLOGY); BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH; CONFLICT OF INTEREST; HUMANS; RESEARCH SUPPORT AS TOPIC; TOXICOLOGY;

EID: 46149091975     PISSN: 07482337     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0748233708089046     Document Type: Article

References (96)

1. Annals of Internal Medicine Editors (2004) Publishing commentary by authors with potential conflicts of interest: When, why, and how. Ann Intern Med 141: 73 – 74.
2. Arenson KW; (2007) Columbia settles student loan case. New York Times; May 31, 2007.
3. Baba A Cook DM McGarity TO Bero LA (2005) Legislating “Sound science”: the role of the tobacco industry. Am J Public Health 95(Suppl. 1): S20 – S27.
4. Barnes DE Bero LA (1997) Scientific quality of original research articles on environmental tobacco smoke. Tob Control 6: 19 – 26.
5. Barnes DE Bero LA (1998) Why review articles on the health effects of passive smoking reach different conclusions. J Am Med Assoc 279: 1566 – 1570.
6. Barrow CS Conrad JW (2006a) Assessing the reliability and credibility of industry science and scientists. Environ Health Perspect 114: 153 – 155.
7. Barrow CS Conrad JW (2006b) Credibility of scientists: Barrow and Conrad respond. Environ Health Perspect 114: A148.
8. Bayh-Dole Act (1980) Government patent policy act of 1980, public law no. 96–517, 94 stat 3015 (1980).
9. Behrens TR Gray DO (2001) Unintended consequences of cooperative research: impact of industry sponsorship on climate for academic freedom and other graduate student outcome. Res Policy 30: 179 – 199.
10. Bekelman JE Li Y Gross CP (2003) Scope and impact of financial conflicts of interest in biomedical research: a systematic review. J Am Med Assoc 289: 454 – 465.
11. Benner M Sandstrom U (2000) Institutionalizing the triple helix: research funding and norms in the academic system. Res Policy 29: 291 – 301.
12. Bitton A Neuman MD Barnoya J Glantz SA (2005) The p53 tumour suppressor gene and the tobacco industry: research, debate, and conflict of interest. Lancet 365: 531 – 540.
13. Blumenthal D Campbell EG Anderson MS Causino N Louis KS (1997) Withholding research results in academic life science. Evidence from a national survey of faculty. J Am Med Assoc 277: 1224 – 1228.
14. Blumenthal D Causino N Campbell E Louis KS (1996) Relationships between academic institutions and industry in the life sciences – an industry survey. N Engl J Med 334: 368 – 373.
15. Blumenthal D Gluck M Louis KS Wise D (1986) Industrial support of university research in biotechnology. Science 231: 242 – 246.
16. Bok DC (1981) Business and the academy. Harv Mag 83: 23 – 35.
17. Bourke P Butler L (1999) The efficacy of different modes of funding research: Perspectives from Australian data on the biological sciences. Res Policy 28: 489 – 499.
18. Boyd EA Bero LA (2000) Assessing faculty financial relationships with industry: a case study. J Am Med Assoc 284: 2209 – 2214.
19. Boyd EA Lipton S Bero LA (2004) Implementation of financial disclosure policies to manage conflicts of interest: how seven university of California campuses deal with their research relationships. Health Aff 23: 206 – 214.
20. Bozeman B Gaughan M (2007) Impacts of grants and contracts on academic researchers’ interactions with industry. Res Policy 36: 694 – 707.
21. Brockway LM Furcht LT (2006) Conflicts of interest in biomedical research – the FASEB guidelines. FASEB J 20: 2435 – 2438.
22. Brodsky R (2007) Don't ask, don't tell. Gov Exec 39: 18 – 19.
23. Callaham ML (2003) Journal policy on ethics in scientific publication. Ann Emerg Med 41: 82 – 89.
24. Campbell EG Louis KS Blumenthal D (1998) Looking a gift horse in the mouth: corporate gifts supporting life sciences research. J Am Med Assoc 279: 995 – 999.
25. Cassell GH (2007) Interactions of the public and private sectors in drug development: boundaries to protect scientific values while preserving innovation. Cleve Clin J Med 74 : S45 – S48.
26. Check E (2007) California campuses resist industry restrictions. Nature 448: 394 – 395.
27. Cho MK Bero LA (1996) The quality of drug studies published in symposium proceedings. Ann Intern Med 124: 495 – 489.
28. Cho MK Shohara R Schissel A Rennie D (2000) Policies on faculty conflicts of interest at US universities. J Am Med Assoc 284: 2203 – 2208.
29. Clapp R Hoppin P Kriebel D (2006) Erosion of the integrity of public health science in the USA. Occup Environ Med 63: 367 – 368.
30. Claxton LD (2005a) Scientific authorship, part 1: a window into scientific fraud? Mutat Res 589: 17 – 30.
31. Claxton LD (2005b) Scientific authorship, part 2: history, recurring issues, practices, and guidelines. Mutat Res 589: 31 – 45.
32. Dalton R (1999) Berkeley dispute festers over biotech deal. Nature 399: 5.
33. Dalton R (2003) Berkeley accused of biotech bias as ecologist is denied tenure. Nature 426: 591 – 594.
34. Dalton R (2007) Berkeley's energy deal with BP sparks unease. Nature 445: 688 – 689.
35. Dearfield KL Stack HF Quest JA Whiting RJ Waters MD (1993) A survey of EPA/OPP and open literature data on selected pesticide chemicals tested for mutagenicity. I. Introduction and first ten chemicals. Mutat Res 297: 197 – 233.
36. Denissenko MF Pao A Tang M Pfeifer GP (1996) Preferential formation of benzo[a]pyrene adducts at lung cancer mutational hotspots in p53. Science 274: 430 – 432.
37. Devine J (2001) Has there been a corporate takeover of EPA science? [Available at: http://www.Insideepa.Com/secure/docnum.Asp?F = epa_2001.Ask&docnum = 2001_11276] Risk Policy Report 8: 35 – 38.
38. Doll R (1998) Effects of exposure to vinyl chloride. An assessment of the evidence. Scand J Work Environ Health 14: 61 – 78.
39. Duvall DG (2006) Conflict of interest or ideological divide: The need for ongoing collaboration between physicians and industry. Curr Med Res Opin 9: 1807 – 1812.
40. Evans GR Packham DE (2003) Ethical issues at the university-industry interface: a way forward? Sci Eng Ethics 9: 3 – 16.
41. Fields N Chapman S (2003) Chasing Ernst L Wynder: 40 years of Philip Morris’ efforts to influence a leading scientist. J Epidemiol Community Health 57: 571 – 578.
42. Friedman PJ (1992) The troublesome semantics of conflict of interest. Ethics Behav 2: 245 – 251.
43. Friedman LC Daynard RA Banthin CN (2005) How tobacco-friendly science escapes scrutiny in the courtroom. Am J Public Health 95: S16 – S20.
44. Friedman LS Richter ED (2004) Relationship between conflicts of interest and research results. J Gen Intern Med 19: 51 – 56.
45. Friedman L Richter ED (2005) Conflicts of interest and scientific integrity. Int J Occup Environ Health 11: 205 – 206.
46. Fugh-Berman A (2005) The corporate coauthor. J Gen Intern Med 20: 546 – 548.
47. Garne D Watson M Chapman S Byrne F (2005) Environmental tobacco smoke research published in the journal Indoor and Built Environment and associations with the tobacco industry. Lancet 365: 804 – 809.
48. George G Zahra SA Wood DR (2002) The effects of business-university alliances on innovative output and financial performance: a study of publicly traded biotechnology companies. J Bus Venturing 17: 577 – 609.
49. Gluck ME Blumenthal D Stoto MA (1987) University–industry relationships in the life sciences: implications for students and post-doctoral fellows. Res Policy 16: 327 – 336.
50. Gold JL (2006) Conflict over conflicts of interest: an analysis of the new NIH rules. J Law Med Ethics 34: 105 – 110.
51. Goozner M (2006) Credibility of scientists: industry versus public interest. Environ Health Perspect 114: A147 [author reply A148].
52. Gulbrandsen M Smeby J-C (2005) Industry funding and university professors’ research performance. Res Policy 34: 932 – 950.
53. Hardell L Walker MJ Walhjalt B Friedman LS Richter ED (2007) Secret ties to industry and conflicting interests in cancer research. Am J Ind Med 50: 227 – 233.
54. Hasselmo N (2002) Individual and institutional conflict of interest: Policy review by research universities in the United States. Sci Eng Ethics 8: 421 – 427.
55. Hutton WL Massey A (2006) Professional ethics and public service: Can professionals serve two masters? Public Money Manage 26: 23 – 30.
56. Kenney M (1987) The ethical dilemmas of university-industry collaborations. J Bus Ethics 6: 127 – 135.
57. Kodish E Murray T Whitehouse P (1996) Conflict of interest in university-industry research relationships: Realities, politics, and values. Acad Med 71: 1287 – 1290.
58. Kondro W (2006) Conflicts cause FDA to review advisory committees. Can Med Assoc J 175: 23 – 24.
59. Krimsky S Rothenberg LS (2001) Conflict of interest policies in science and medical journals: editorial practices and author disclosures. Sci Eng Ethics Behav 7: 205 – 218.
60. Labaton S; (2007) Nominee to head consumer agency withdraws. New York Times; May 23, 2007.
61. LaViolette PA (2007) Medical devices and conflict of interest: unique issues and an industry code to address them. Cleve Clin J Med 74 : S26 – S28.
62. Lehman-McKeeman L Peterson RE (2003) Guidelines governing conflict of interest. Toxicol Sci 72: 183 – 184.
63. Lemmens T Freedman B (2000) Ethics review for sale? Conflict of interest and commercial research review boards. Milbank Q 78: 547 – 584.
64. Lexchin J Bero LA Djulbegovic B Clark O (2003) Pharmaceutical industry sponsorship and research outcome and quality: systematic review. Br Med J 326: 1167 – 1170.
65. Markowitz G Rosner D (2002) Deceit and denial: the deadly politics of industrial pollution. Berkeley, CA : University of California Press. pp. 408.
66. Maurissen JP Gilbert SG Sander M Beauchamp TL Johnson S Schwetz BA Goozner M Barrow CS (2005) Workshop proceedings: managing conflict of interest in science. A little consensus and a lot of controversy. Toxicol Sci 87: 11 – 14.
67. Mowery D Nelson RR Sampat BN Ziedonis AA (2001) The growth of patenting and licensing by U.S. Universities: an assessment of the effects of the Bayh-Dole act of 1980. Res Policy 30: 99 – 119.
68. Nature Editorial (2007) California dreaming. Nature 448: 388 – 388.
69. Newman A; (2007) To sell Brooklyn, borough leader took free trip on cruise ship. New York Times; May 26, 2007.
70. Office of General Counsel (2006) Ethics resource guide. Washington, D.C. : U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
71. Omenn GS (1983) University-corporate relations in science and technology: an analysis of specific models. In: T Langfelt F Hackncy A Fishman H Golowsky (eds), Partners in the Research Enterprise: Universities-Corporations in Science and Technology. Philadelphia, PA : University of Pennsylvania Press.
72. Ong EK Glantz SA (2001) Constructing “Sound science” and “Good epidemiology”: tobacco, lawyers, and public relations firms. Am J Public Health 91: 1749 – 1757.
73. Pronin E Gilovich T Ross L (2004) Objectivity in the eye of the beholder: divergent perceptions of bias in self versus others. Psychol Rev 111: 781 – 799.
74. Purchase IFH (2004) Fraud, errors and gamesmanship in experimental toxicology. Toxicology 202: 1 – 20.
75. Rumsey TS (1999) One editor's views on conflict of interest. J Anim Sci 77: 2379 – 2383.
76. Samet JM Burke TA (2001) Turning science into junk: the tobacco industry and passive smoking. Am J Public Health 91: 1742 – 1744.
77. Sass JB Castleman B Wallinga D (2005) Vinyl chloride. A case study of data suppression and misrepresentation. Environ Health Perspect 113: 809 – 812.
78. Sass J (2006) Credibility of scientists: conflict of interest and bias. Environ Health Perspect 114: A147 – A148 [author reply A148].
79. Sengupta S; (2007) Sri Lanka human rights panel is criticized. New York Times; June 11, 2007.
80. Smith EA (2007) ‘It's interesting how few people die from smoking’: tobacco industry efforts to minimize risk and discredit health promotion. Eur J Public Health 17: 162 – 170.
81. Soule E (2007) Managing ethical performance in organizations: insights from the corporate world. Cleve Clin J Med 74: S73 – S76.
82. Stark A (2000) Conflict of interest in American public life Boston. MA : Harvard University Press. pp. 384.
83. Stark A (2006) Canada's upside-down world of public-sector ethics. Res Public Policy Anal Manage 14: 109 – 134.
84. Steinbrook R (2004) Conflicts of interest at the NIH – resolving the problem. N Engl J Med 351: 955 – 957.
85. Sugarman SD (2005) Conflicts of interest in the roles of the university professor. Theoretical Inquiries in Law 6: 255 – 275.
86. The National Academies (2003) Policy on committee composition and balance and conflicts of interest for committees used in the development of reports. Washington, D.C. : The National Academies.
87. Thompson DF (1993) Understanding financial conflicts of interest. N Engl J Med 329: 573 – 576.
88. U.S. Congress (1972) Federal advisory committee act [FACA] 5 U.S.C. app., As Amended; 1972.
89. U.S. EPA (2005) Good laboratory practice standards. 40 cfr 160. Washington, DC : U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
90. Vagelos PR (2007) Innovation and industry-academia interactions: where conflicts arise and measures to avoid them. Cleve Clin J Med 74 : S12 – S13.
91. Van McCrary S Anderson CB Jakovljevic J Khan T McCullough LB Wray NP Brody BA (2000) A national survey of policies on disclosure of conflicts of interest in biomedical research. N Engl J Med 343: 1621 – 1626.
92. vom Saal FS Hughes C (2005) An extensive new literature concerning low-dose effects of bisphenol A shows the need for a new risk assessment. Environ Health Perspect 113: 926 – 933.
93. Wolpe PR (2006) Reasons scientists avoid thinking about ethics. Cell 125: 1023 – 1025.
94. World Health Organisation (2003) Guidelines for WHO guidelines, Report No. EIP/GPE/EQC/2003.1.
95. World Health Organisation (2005) Draft guidelines for declaration of interest (WHO experts).
96. Yach D Bialous SA (2001) Junking science to promote tobacco. Am J Public Health 91: 1745 – 1748.