Industry funded clinical trials: Bias and quality

Current Medical Research and Opinion

Volumn 28, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 23-25

  Del Parigi, Angelo ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

Clinical trials; Conflict of interest; Industry sponsorship; Misconduct; Quality

Indexed keywords

ACCURACY; CLINICAL RESEARCH; CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); FUNDING; HUMAN; INFORMATION PROCESSING; QUALITY CONTROL; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); REVIEW;

BIAS (EPIDEMIOLOGY); BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH; CLINICAL TRIALS AS TOPIC; CONFLICT OF INTEREST; DRUG INDUSTRY; EVALUATION STUDIES AS TOPIC; FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT; FINANCING, GOVERNMENT; HUMANS; QUALITY OF HEALTH CARE; RESEARCH DESIGN;

EID: 84855964384     PISSN: 03007995     EISSN: 14734877     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1185/03007995.2011.628651     Document Type: Review

References (21)

1. Gluud LL. Unravelling industry bias in clinical trials. Pain 2006;121:175-6
2. Angell M. Industry-sponsored clinical research: a broken system. JAMA 2008;300:1069-71
3. DeAngelis CD, Fontanarosa PB. Ensuring integrity in industry-sponsored research: primum non nocere, revisited. JAMA 2010;303:1196-8
4. Cope MB, Allison DB. White hat bias: a threat to the integrity of scientific reporting. Acta Paediatr 2010;99:1615-17
5. Borgert CJ. Conflict of interest: kill the messenger or follow the data? Environ Sci Technol 2007;41:665 (Pubitemid 46208494)
6. The Plos Medicine Editors. Making sense of non-financial competing interests. PLoS Med 2008;5:e199
7. Lesser LI, Ebbeling CB, Goozner M, et al. Relationship between funding source and conclusion among nutrition-related scientific articles. PloS Med 2007;4:41-6
8. Woolley KL, Lew RA, Stretton S, et al. Lack of involvement of medical writers and the pharmaceutical industry in publications retracted for misconduct: a systematic, controlled, retrospective study. Curr Med Res Opin 2011;27:1175-82
9. ls-Nielsen B, Chen W, Gluud C, et al. Association of funding and conclusions in randomized drug trials: a reflection of treatment effect or adverse events? JAMA 2003;290:921-8 (Pubitemid 37430464)
10. Thomas O, Thabane L, Douketis J, et al. Industry funding and the reporting quality of large long-term weight loss trials. Int J Obes (Lond) 2008;32:1531-6
11. Boutron I, Dutton S, Ravaud P, et al. Reporting and interpretation of randomized controlled trials with statistically nonsignificant results for primary outcomes. JAMA 2010;303:2058-64
12. Allison DB, Cope MB. Randomized controlled trials with statistically nonsignificant results. JAMA 2010;304:965
13. Cope MB, Allison DB. White hat bias: examples of its presence in obesity research and a call for renewed commitment to faithfulness in research reporting. Int J Obes (Lond) 2010;34:84-8
14. Golder S, Loke YK. Is there evidence for biased reporting of published adverse effects data in pharmaceutical industry-funded studies? Br J Clin Pharmacol 2008;66:767-73
15. Barden J, Derry S, McQuay HJ, et al. Bias from industry trial funding? A framework, a suggested approach, and a negative result. Pain 2006;121:207-18
16. LaRosa JC, He J, Vupputuri S. Effect of statins on risk of coronary disease: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. JAMA 1999;282:2340-6 (Pubitemid 30013066)
17. MRC/BHF Heart Protection Study of cholesterol lowering with simvastatin in 20,536 high-risk individuals: a randomised placebo-controlled trial. Lancet 2002;360:7-22
18. Gartlehner G, Morgan L, Thieda P, et al. The effect of study sponsorship on a systematically evaluated body of evidence of head-to-head trials was modest: secondary analysis of a systematic review. J Clin Epidemiol 2010;63:117-25
19. Del Parigi A. Academic medical centers and the pharmaceutical industry. Clin Pharmacol Ther 2010;88:464-5
20. Allison DB. The antidote to bias in research. Science 2009;326:522-3
21. Del Parigi A. Promise and limitations of functional neuroimaging in the study of obesity: is it time for a consortium and a multicenter trial? Int J Obes (Lond) 2009;33:607-10