Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Correspondence
  • Published:

Bias in high-tier medical journals concerning physician-academic relationships with industry

Nature Biotechnology volume 30, pages 320–322 (2012)Cite this article

Subjects

To the Editor:

Economists have concluded that extensive interaction between academic researchers and practicing physicians with industry has facilitated the development and dissemination of biomedical diagnostics, devices and therapies1,2,3. However, academic health centers, states and the federal government have instituted regulations designed to monitor, limit or eliminate such interactions based on concerns that a downside is that such relationships may degrade the performance and reporting of biomedical research and also induce physicians to behave in a manner inconsistent with cost-effective or ethical patient care—which are loosely defined under the operational term 'financial conflicts of interest' (COIs).

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1

References

  1. Lichtenberg, F. Phamacoeconomics 24 Suppl 3, 5–25 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Cutler, D., Rosen, A. & Vijan, S. N. Engl. J. Med. 355, 920–927 (2006).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Kneller, R. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 9, 867–882 (2010).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Dewey, M. Br. J. Psychiatry 143, 487–489 (1983).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Neuendorf, K. The Content Analysis Guidebook (Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, California, 2002).

    Google Scholar 

  6. Lombard, M., Snyder-Duch, J. & Bracken, C. Hum. Commun. Res. 29, 469–472 (2003).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Lurie, P., Almeida, C., Stine, N., Stine, A. & Wolfe, S. J. Am. Med. Assoc. 295, 1921–1928 (2006).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Hampson, L. et al. N. Engl. J. Med. 355, 2330–2337 (2006).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Gray, S., Hlubocky, F., Ratain, M. & Daugherty, C. J. Clin. Oncol. 25, 3488–3494 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Hamilton, A., Madison, J. & Jay, J. The Federalist Papers (1788) (New American Library (Mentor), 1962).

    Google Scholar 

  11. Rawls, J. A Theory of Justice (Harvard University Press, 1971).

    Google Scholar 

  12. Kuran, T. & Sunstein, C. Stanford Law Rev. 51, 683–768 (1999).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Sunstein, C. Conformity and dissent. University of Chicago Olin Working Paper No. 164. (University of Chicago, IL, 2002).

    Google Scholar 

  14. Sunstein, C. Yale Law J. 110, 71–119 (2000).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Asch, S. Sci. Am. 193, 31–35 (1955).

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We appreciate advice provided by J. Niederdeppe, Department of Communications, Cornell University. This work was supported in part by grants from The Association of Clinical Researchers and Educators and from the Searle Freedom Trust.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Navigant Consulting, Inc., New York, New York, USA

    Roman Lesko

  2. University of Baltimore Law School, Baltimore, Maryland, USA

    Samuel Scott

  3. Translational Medicine Division and Center for Medical Innovation, Brigham & Women's Hospital,

    Thomas P Stossel

  4. Department of Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA

    Thomas P Stossel

Authors
  1. Roman Lesko
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Samuel Scott
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Thomas P Stossel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Thomas P Stossel.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

T.P.S. has been awarded a grant from the Searle Freedom Trust to study physician- and academic-industry relationships. The Trust had no participation in the conception, design, performance or reporting of the study. Although T.P.S. has various industry relationships, the paper does not address any topic relevant to these relationships. R.L. and S.S. received funding from the Association of Clinical Researchers and Educators to participate in the analysis. The Association had no input into the conception, design, performance or reporting of the research described.

Supplementary information

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lesko, R., Scott, S. & Stossel, T. Bias in high-tier medical journals concerning physician-academic relationships with industry. Nat Biotechnol 30, 320–322 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt.2179

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt.2179

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing: Translational Research

Sign up for the Nature Briefing: Translational Research newsletter — top stories in biotechnology, drug discovery and pharma.

Get what matters in translational research, free to your inbox weekly. Sign up for Nature Briefing: Translational Research