The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Relationships between Academic Institutions and Industry in the Life Sciences — An Industry Survey
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Despite growing acceptance of relationships between academia and industry in the life sciences, systematic, up-to-date information about their extent and the consequences for the parties involved remains scarce. We attempted to collect information about the prevalence, magnitude, commercial benefits, and potential risks of such relationships by surveying a representative sample of life-science companies in the United States to determine their relationships with academic institutions. METHODS: We collected data by telephone from May through September 1994 from senior executives of 210 life-science companies (of 306 companies surveyed; response rate, 69 percent). The sample contained all Fortune 500 companies in the fields of agriculture, chemicals, and pharmaceuticals; all international pharmaceutical companies with sales volumes similar to those of the Fortune 500 companies; and a random sample of non-Fortune 500 companies in the life sciences drawn from multiple commercial and noncommercial directories. Both the survey instrument and the survey methods resembled those of our 1984 study of 106 biotechnology companies, allowing us to assess the evolution of relationships between academia and industry over the past decade. RESULTS: Ninety percent of companies conducting life-science research in the United States had relationships involving the life sciences with an academic institution in 1994. Fifty-nine percent supported research in such institutions, providing an estimated $1.5 billion, or approximately 11.7 percent of all research-and-development funding received that year. The agreements with universities tended to be short-term and to involve small amounts, implying that most such relationships supported applied research or development. Over 60 percent of companies providing support for life-science research in universities had received patents, products, and sales as a result of those relationships. At the same time, the companies reported that their relationships with universities often included agreements to keep the results of research secret beyond the time needed to file a patent. From 1984 to 1994, the involvement of industry with academic institutions has increased, but the characteristics of the relationships have remained remarkably stable. CONCLUSIONS: After more than a decade of sustained interaction, universities and industries seem to have formed durable partnerships in the life sciences, although the relationships may pose greater threats to the openness of scientific communication than universities generally acknowledge. However, industrial support for university research is much smaller in amount than federal support, and companies are unlikely to be able to compensate for sizable federal cutbacks.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Scope and Impact of Financial Conflicts of Interest in Biomedical Research: A Systematic Review
Bekelman, J. E., Li, Y., & Gross, C. P. (2003) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.289.4.454 · Cited by 1,816
Putting Patents in Context: Exploring Knowledge Transfer from MIT
Agrawal, A., & Henderson, R. (2002) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.48.1.44.14279 · Cited by 1,017
A National Survey of Physician–Industry Relationships
Campbell, E. G., Gruen, R. L., Mountford, J., Miller, L. G., Cleary, P. D., & Blumenthal, D. (2007) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmsa064508 · Cited by 553
Self-citationPublication and related biases.
Song, Eastwood, Gilbody, Duley, & Sutton (2000) · Health Technology Assessment · doi:10.3310/hta4100 · Cited by 427
Fostering integrity in research: Definitions, current knowledge, and future directions
Steneck, N. H. (2006) · Science and Engineering Ethics · doi:10.1007/pl00022268 · Cited by 407
Metadata
- Authors
- Blumenthal, D., Causino, N., Campbell, E., & Louis, K. S.
- Venue
- New England Journal of Medicine
- Publisher
- Massachusetts Medical Society
- Published
- 1996-02-08
- Volume
- 334
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 368-374
- ISSN
- 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
- 1533-4406
- OpenAlex
- W2038810865
- Cited by
- 401
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 49.53
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Relationships between Academic Institutions and Industry in the Life Sciences — An Industry Survey. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1056/nejm199602083340606
- The paper
- Blumenthal, D., Causino, N., Campbell, E., & Louis, K. S. (1996). Relationships between Academic Institutions and Industry in the Life Sciences — An Industry Survey. New England Journal of Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejm199602083340606
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.