The DOI matches its Crossref record; 77 of the 81 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Pharmaceutical industry sponsorship and research outcome and quality: systematic review
Open accessAbstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether funding of drug studies by the pharmaceutical industry is associated with outcomes that are favourable to the funder and whether the methods of trials funded by pharmaceutical companies differ from the methods in trials with other sources of support. METHODS: Medline (January 1966 to December 2002) and Embase (January 1980 to December 2002) searches were supplemented with material identified in the references and in the authors' personal files. Data were independently abstracted by three of the authors and disagreements were resolved by consensus. RESULTS: 30 studies were included. Research funded by drug companies was less likely to be published than research funded by other sources. Studies sponsored by pharmaceutical companies were more likely to have outcomes favouring the sponsor than were studies with other sponsors (odds ratio 4.05; 95% confidence interval 2.98 to 5.51; 18 comparisons). None of the 13 studies that analysed methods reported that studies funded by industry was of poorer quality. CONCLUSION: Systematic bias favours products which are made by the company funding the research. Explanations include the selection of an inappropriate comparator to the product being investigated and publication bias.
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.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“pharmaceutical companies, who fund a substantial number of RCTs, are more likely to seek publication of results with statistically positive outcomes. 9”
From Reporting research results: a moral obligation for all researchers. (2007) · cites this paper as [9]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Several investigations show strong associations between the source of funding and the conclusions of research articles [ 219 – 222 ].”
From Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE): Explanation and Elaboration (2007) · cites this paper as [222]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Empirical evidence points toward funding source sometimes being associated with estimated treatment effects [30].”
From CONSORT 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials (2010) · cites this paper as [30]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“For example, bias, as indicated by a prevalence of more favourable outcomes, has been demonstrated for clinical research funded by industry compared with studies funded by other sources [257–259].”
From Reporting animal research: Explanation and elaboration for the ARRIVE guidelines 2.0 (2020) · cites this paper as [259]
In the citing paper
“Additionally, different outcomes from the same trials can be a source of pharmaceutical marketing bias.35”
In the citing paper
“Lexchin and colleagues [166] observed that outcomes of reports of randomized trials and meta-analyses of clinical trials funded by the pharmaceutical industry are more likely to favor the sponsor's product compared to studies with other sources of funding.”
From The PRISMA Statement for Reporting Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Studies That Evaluate Health Care Interventions: Explanation and Elaboration (2009) · cites this paper as [166]
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
Cites
The Revised CONSORT Statement for Reporting Randomized Trials: Explanation and Elaboration
Altman, D. G., Schulz, K. F., Moher, D., Egger, M., Davidoff, F., Elbourne, D., Gøtzsche, P. C., Lang, T., & for the CONSORT Group (2001) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-134-8-200104170-00012 · Cited by 3,835
Moher, D., Pham, B., Jones, A., Cook, D. J., Jadad, A. R., Moher, M., Tugwell, P., & Klassen, T. P. (1998) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(98)01085-x · Cited by 3,560
Publication bias in clinical research
Easterbrook, P. J., Gopalan, R., Berlin, J. A., & Matthews, D. R. (1991) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/0140-6736(91)90201-y · Cited by 3,109
Moher, D. (2001) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.285.15.1987 · Cited by 2,545
Hennekens, C. H., Buring, J. E., & Mayrent, S. L. (1987) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 2,319
The Hazards of Scoring the Quality of Clinical Trials for Meta-analysis
Jüni, P. (1999) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.282.11.1054 · Cited by 1,981
(1988) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-108-2-316_4 · Cited by 1,938
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
Moher, D., Schulz, K. F., Altman, D. G., & for the CONSORT Group* (2001) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-134-8-200104170-00011 · Cited by 1,426
Factors Influencing Publication of Research Results
Dickersin, K. (1992) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.1992.03480030052036 · Cited by 931
Research works printed but not linked: 7
- Djulbegovic, 1999, Violation of the uncertainty principle in conduct of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of erythropoietin (EPO)., Blood, 94, 399A
- 10.1056/NEJM199304223281612 · DOI
- Wahlbeck, 1999, Sponsored drug trials show more-favourable outcomes., BMJ, 318, 465
- Massie, 1984, Impact of pharmaceutical industry funding of clinical research: results of a survey of antianginal trials., Circulation, 70, 390S
- 10.1001/jama.1997.03540390068038 · DOI
- 10.1001/jama.281.24.2287 · DOI
- 10.1001/jama.1990.03440100121018 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 601–700 of 1,003
Delgado, A. F., & Delgado, A. F. (2017) · Trials · doi:10.1186/s13063-017-1872-0 · Cited by 39
“One could argue that the differences in outcome between funding types can be explained by publication bias whereby industry groups rarely publish negative results and drug industry-funded research is less likely to be published [15].”
BackgroundResultAdverse effects in homeopathy. A systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies
Stub, T., Kristoffersen, A. E., Overvåg, G., Jong, M. C., Musial, F., & Liu, J. (2020) · EXPLORE · doi:10.1016/j.explore.2020.11.008 · Cited by 42
Minssen, T., Neethu, R., & Bogers, M. L. A. M. (2019) · Science and Public Policy · doi:10.1093/scipol/scaa014 · Cited by 38
van Kessel, L., Teunissen, D. A. M., & Lagro‐Janssen, A. L. M. (2021) · International Journal of General Medicine · doi:10.2147/ijgm.s291964 · Cited by 37
“Research shows that studies sponsored by pharmaceutical companies are more likely to find outcomes that benefit the sponsor than studies that are not and that there is a significant publication bias for such studies.(38) Such pharmaceutical funding should be kept in mind when interpreting the observed results.”
BackgroundIto, C., Hashimoto, A., Uemura, K., & Oba, K. (2021) · JAMA Network Open · doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.35765 · Cited by 37
Sasse, E. C., Sasse, A. D., Brandalise, S. R., Clark, O. A. C., & Richards, S. M. (2005) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd004139.pub2 · Cited by 36
Self-citationEducating for Global Mental Health
Applbaum, K. (2006) · Duke University Press eBooks · doi:10.1215/9780822387916-004 · Cited by 36
Conflict of interest disclosure as a reminder of professional norms: Clients first!
Sah, S. (2019) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2019.07.005 · Cited by 35
Ginseng for managing menopausal woman's health
Lee, H. W., Choi, J., Lee, Y., Kil, K.-J., & Lee, M. S. (2016) · Medicine · doi:10.1097/md.0000000000004914 · Cited by 35
Cristea, I. A., Gentili, C., Pietrini, P., & Cuijpers, P. J. (2016) · The British Journal of Psychiatry · doi:10.1192/bjp.bp.115.179275 · Cited by 35
Prescription of psychotropic drugs to patients with schizophrenia: an Italian national survey
The National Mental Health Project Working Group, Magliano, L., Fiorillo, A., Guarneri, M., Marasco, C., Rosa, C. D., Malangone, C., & Maj, M. (2004) · European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology · doi:10.1007/s00228-004-0803-7 · Cited by 34
Information Literacy and Technology: An Examination of Some Issues
Grafstein, A. J. (2007) · portal Libraries and the Academy · doi:10.1353/pla.2007.0006 · Cited by 35
Wilson, C. A., Kerr, D. M., Noel-Storr, A. H., & Quinn, T. J. (2015) · International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry · doi:10.1002/gps.4283 · Cited by 35
Sustaining Vaccine Confidence in the 21st Century
Hardt, K., Schmidt‐Ott, R., Glismann, S., Adegbola, R. A., & Meurice, F. (2013) · Vaccines · doi:10.3390/vaccines1030204 · Cited by 36
“Moreover, concerns raised in the past, regarding issues, such as bias in the publication of trial results [104–108], the relationship between industry and the medical profession and patients‘ organizations [109–112] and the regulation of promotional activities and materials [113], have had a negative impact on informa…”
BackgroundAspinall, S. L., Good, C. B., Glassman, P. A., & Valentino, M. A. (2005) · Medical Care · doi:10.1097/01.mlr.0000170004.17480.49 · Cited by 35
“In general, conclusions in randomized, controlled trials funded by for-profit organizations tend to be more positive and may minimize adverse outcomes.(34,35) A recent study explored whether this association reflected more beneficial treatment effects or less frequent adverse events.”
BackgroundImplementation Of Financial Disclosure Policies To Manage Conflicts Of Interest
Boyd, E. A., Lipton, S., & Bero, L. A. (2004) · Health Affairs · doi:10.1377/hlthaff.23.2.206 · Cited by 35
Self-citationUngprasert, P., Thongprayoon, C., & Davis, J. M. (2015) · Seminars in Arthritis and Rheumatism · doi:10.1016/j.semarthrit.2015.09.004 · Cited by 34
“Recent studies had demonstrated that industry-supported trials tend to show more favorable results to their products compared with trials that were not supported by the industry [43,44].”
ResultThe Cycle of Bias in Health Research: A Framework and Toolbox for Critical Appraisal Training
Odierna, D. H., Forsyth, S. R., White, J., & Bero, L. A. (2013) · Accountability in Research · doi:10.1080/08989621.2013.768931 · Cited by 40
Self-citationUnited States Private-Sector Physicians and Pharmaceutical Contract Research: A Qualitative Study
Fisher, J. A., & Kalbaugh, C. A. (2012) · PLoS Medicine · doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1001271 · Cited by 36
“As a result, private-sector investigators, who by self-report in our study are not interested in or trained to understand the science, potentially facilitate the pharmaceutical industry’s ability to exert more control over information about their products, including any negative data generated from clinical trials [9,…”
BackgroundMethodResultEvidence-Based Medicine: Watching Out for Its Friends
Brody, H., Miller, F., & Bogdan-Lovis, E. (2005) · Perspectives in biology and medicine · doi:10.1353/pbm.2005.0085 · Cited by 33
Impact of industry collaboration on randomised controlled trials in oncology
Linker, A. S., Yang, A. W., Roper, N., Whitaker, E. M., & Korenstein, D. R. (2016) · European Journal of Cancer · doi:10.1016/j.ejca.2016.11.005 · Cited by 34
Wu, D., Yue, J., & Tam, L. (2017) · Lara D. Veeken · doi:10.1093/rheumatology/kex452 · Cited by 34
Trial Registration and Declaration of Registration by Authors of Randomized Controlled Trials
McGee, R., Su, M. Z., Kelly, P. J., Higgins, G. Y., Craig, J. C., & Webster, A. C. (2011) · Transplantation · doi:10.1097/tp.0b013e318232baf2 · Cited by 35
Funding Source and Research Report Quality in Nutrition Practice-Related Research
Myers, E. F., Parrott, J. S., Cummins, D. S., & Splett, P. L. (2011) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0028437 · Cited by 34
“Studies investigating both non-nutrition-related and nutrition-related research have reported that published findings are likely to favor funder interests [7–14].”
BackgroundRandomized Trials of Neurosurgical Interventions: A Systematic Appraisal
Vranos, G., Tatsioni, A., Polyzoidis, K. S., & Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2004) · Neurosurgery · doi:10.1227/01.neu.0000126873.00845.a7 · Cited by 34
“For medical treatments, systematic biases may be inflated when the manufacturer of the product under study funds the research (28); however, funding has been identified as a positive predictor of higher quality in surgical RCTs (4).”
BackgroundDjulbegović, B., Cantor, A. B., & Clarke, M. J. (2003) · Accountability in Research · doi:10.1080/714906103 · Cited by 34
“A recent systematic review confirmed this finding (Lexchin et al., 2003).”
BackgroundA national survey on the effect of pharmaceutical promotion on medical students
Vainiomäki, M., Helve, O., & Vuorenkoski, L. (2004) · Medical Teacher · doi:10.1080/01421590400004890 · Cited by 34
“In another review Lexchin et al. (2003) showed that research sponsored by companies is four times more likely to produce results favouring the company’s product than that funded by other sources.”
BackgroundHuman recombinant activated protein C for severe sepsis
Martí-Carvajal, A. J., Salanti, G., & Cardona, A. F. (2007) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd004388.pub2 · Cited by 34
Science and money: problems and solutions
Resnik, D. B. (2014) · Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education · doi:10.1128/jmbe.v15i2.792 · Cited by 33
“Three systematic reviews of over 40 publications examining the relationship between sources of funding and research outcomes found that studies with industry funding were more likely to report results that favored the company’s products than studies with independent sources of funding (6, 2, 13).”
McCarthyism, conflict of interest andAddiction's new transparency declaration procedures
Babor, T. F., & Miller, P. G. (2014) · Addiction · doi:10.1111/add.12384 · Cited by 33
Rose, S. L., Krzyzanowska, M. K., & Joffe, S. (2010) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.2008.21.6606 · Cited by 34
“studies are more likely than other studies to favor novel interventions.(16-27) The mechanisms under-”
ResultTime-Lag Bias in Trials of Pediatric Antidepressants: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Reyes, M. M., Panza, K. E., Martin, A., & Bloch, M. H. (2010) · Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry · doi:10.1016/j.jaac.2010.10.008 · Cited by 34
Killeen, A. C., Harn, J. A., Erickson, L. M., Yu, F., & Reinhardt, R. A. (2016) · Journal of Periodontology · doi:10.1902/jop.2016.150551 · Cited by 33
Yu, F., Akin‐Fajiye, M., Thapa‐Magar, K. B., Ren, J., & Gurevitch, J. (2016) · Diversity and Distributions · doi:10.1111/ddi.12481 · Cited by 33
“We used the methodology of systematic reviews, well established in medical and social sciences (Cook et al., 1997; Lexchin et al., 2003; Montori et al., 2005; Moher et al., 2007; Liberati et al., 2009) but only relatively recently introduced in ecology and conservation (Pullin & Stewart, 2006;…”
MethodMiyao, H., & Kotake, Y. (2019) · Anesthesia & Analgesia · doi:10.1213/ane.0000000000004592 · Cited by 33
Torgerson, T., Wayant, C., Cosgrove, L., Akl, E. A., Checketts, J. X., Dal‐Ré, R., Gill, J., Grover, S. C., Khan, N. A., Khan, R., et al. (2020) · BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine · doi:10.1136/bmjebm-2020-111503 · Cited by 33
The quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials in solid organ transplantation
Pengel, L. H. M., Barcena, L., & Morris, P. J. (2008) · Transplant International · doi:10.1111/j.1432-2277.2008.00789.x · Cited by 33
“conducted a systematic review investigating whether drug studies funded by the pharmaceutical industry differ in methods from studies with other sources of funding [13].”
BackgroundChande, N., MacDonald, J. K., Wang, J. J., & McDonald, J. W. (2011) · Inflammatory Bowel Diseases · doi:10.1002/ibd.21776 · Cited by 33
“Industry-funded studies may be more likely to be associated with positive results for the products made by the company funding the research.(49,50) No benefit was found with the addition of LMWH to standard therapy in Zezos et al,(20) in which participants and evaluators were not blinded to treatment allocation.”
BackgroundBridoux, V., Moutel, G., Roman, H., Kianifard, B., Michot, F., Hervé, C., & Tuech, J. (2012) · Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery · doi:10.1007/s11605-012-1952-0 · Cited by 33
CONSORT 2010: Aktualisierte Leitlinie für Berichte randomisierter Studien im Parallelgruppen-Design
Pittler, M. H., Blümle, A., Meerpohl, J. J., & Antes, G. (2011) · DMW - Deutsche Medizinische Wochenschrift · doi:10.1055/s-0031-1272980 · Cited by 35
Handbook of Medical Sociology, Sixth Edition
Conrad, P., Bird, C., Fremont, A., & Timmermans, S. (2010) · Vanderbilt University Press eBooks · doi:10.2307/j.ctv16h2n9s · Cited by 37
Is it better to consent to an RCT or to care?
Dreyfuss, D. (2004) · Intensive Care Medicine · doi:10.1007/s00134-004-2493-0 · Cited by 33
“A similar bias has been reported with other studies funded by the pharmaceutical industry and ascribed to the use of an inappropriate comparator or to publication bias [21].”
ResultSymmons, D. P. M., Hooper, L., Brown, T. J., Elliott, R. A., Payne, K., & Roberts, C. (2005) · Cited by 33
Staessen, J. A., Thijs, L., & Birkenhäger, W. H. (2004) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(04)17010-4 · Cited by 33
Conflict of Interest in Peer-Reviewed Medical Journals
Ferris, L. E., & Fletcher, R. H. (2010) · Neurosurgery · doi:10.1227/01.neu.0000369904.38343.e4 · Cited by 33
Toward improved evidence standards and methods for rehabilitation: recommendations and challenges.
Johnston, M., & Dijkers, M. (2012) · Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation · doi:10.1016/j.apmr.2011.12.011 · Cited by 34
Six problems with pharma-funded bioethics
Elliott, C. (2004) · Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.shpsc.2003.12.008 · Cited by 32
“11 Lexchin, Bero, Djulbegovic, & Clark (2003) ; Avorn, Chen, & Hartley (1982); Melander, Ahlqvist-”
Lander, E. (2005) · Redalyc (Universidad Autónoma del Estado de México) · Cited by 32
Publication bias in the pulmonary/allergy literature: effect of pharmaceutical company sponsorship.
LISS, H. P. (2006) · PubMed · Cited by 32
What do cost-effective health behaviour-change interventions contain? A comparison of six domains
Beard, E., West, R., Lorencatto, F., Gardner, B., Michie, S., Owens, L., & Shahab, L. (2019) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0213983 · Cited by 32
A systematic review and meta‐analysis of treatments for rapid cycling bipolar disorder
Strawbridge, R., Kurana, S., Kerr‐Gaffney, J., Jauhar, S., Kaufman, K. R., Yalın, N., & Young, A. H. (2022) · Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica · doi:10.1111/acps.13471 · Cited by 37
“, funding or sponsoring of studies by pharmaceutical manufacturers).(61) Approximately half of our included studies were indicated to have a potential allegiance bias and this differed between intervention category; antidepressant and mood stabiliser specific studies had a potential allegiance bias in one third of stu…”
ResultSchünemann, H. J., Woodhead, M. A., Anzueto, A., Buist, A. S., MacNee, W., Rabe, K. F., & Heffner, J. E. (2012) · Proceedings of the American Thoracic Society · doi:10.1513/pats.201208-053st · Cited by 32
Research ethics II: Mentoring, collaboration, peer review, and data management and ownership.
Horner, J., & Minifie, F. (2011) · Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research · doi:10.1044/1092-4388(2010/09-0264 · Cited by 43
Pharmaceutical Industry Financial Support for Medical Education: Benefit, or Undue Influence?
Brody, H. A. (2009) · The Journal of Law Medicine & Ethics · doi:10.1111/j.1748-720x.2009.00406.x · Cited by 32
Nkansah, N., Nguyen, T. U., Iraninezhad, H., & Bero, L. A. (2009) · Public Health Nutrition · doi:10.1017/s136898000900487x · Cited by 32
Self-citationGray, S. W., Hlubocky, F. J., Ratain, M. J., & Daugherty, C. K. (2007) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.2007.11.7283 · Cited by 32
How can Feminist Theories of Evidence Assist Clinical Reasoning and Decision-making?
Goldenberg, M. J. (2013) · Social Epistemology · doi:10.1080/02691728.2013.794871 · Cited by 32
“Having read the past literature about sponsorship bias that has appeared in the medical journals, the physician is quite familiar with the finding that pharmasponsored trials tend to score higher in methodological rigor than publicly funded trials, and they are four-times more likely to ascertain positive results for…”
BackgroundNicotinic receptor partial agonists as novel compounds for the treatment of smoking cessation
Tutka, P. (2008) · Expert Opinion on Investigational Drugs · doi:10.1517/13543784.17.10.1473 · Cited by 32
“Evidence from recent systematic reviews suggests that industry-funded trials, although conducted to a high standard, are more likely to have outcomes favorable to the product sponsor than studies with other sponsors [53,95] .”
ResultNagendrababu, V., Duncan, H. F., FOUAD, A. F., Kirkevang, L., Parashos, P., Pigg, M., Væth, M., Jayaraman, J., Suresh, N., Jakovljević, A., et al. (2023) · International Endodontic Journal · doi:10.1111/iej.13909 · Cited by 31
House, E. (2008) · American Journal of Evaluation · doi:10.1177/1098214008322640 · Cited by 26
Antoniou, M. N., Robinson, C., & Fagan, J. (2012) · Cited by 35
A Guide to the Extrapyramidal Side-Effects of Antipsychotic Drugs
Owens, D. G. C. (2014) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9781139149112 · Cited by 32
Methodological quality of systematic reviews on treatments for osteoporosis: A cross-sectional study
Tsoi, A. K., Ho, L. T. F., Wu, I. X. Y., Wong, C. H. L., Ho, R. S. T., Lim, J. Y. Y., Mao, C., Lee, E. K. P., & Chung, V. C. (2020) · Bone · doi:10.1016/j.bone.2020.115541 · Cited by 32
Oral contraceptives containing drospirenone for premenstrual syndrome
Ma, S., & Song, S. J. (2023) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd006586.pub5 · Cited by 31
Does the Pharmaceutical Industry Influence Guidelines? Two Examples From Germany
Schott, G., Dünnweber, C., Mühlbauer, B., Niebling, W., Pachl, H., & Ludwig, W.-D. (2013) · Deutsches Ärzteblatt international · doi:10.3238/arztebl.2013.0575 · Cited by 31
Hua, F., Walsh, T., Glenny, A., & Worthington, H. V. (2015) · European Journal of Orthodontics · doi:10.1093/ejo/cjv094 · Cited by 31
“Besides, as previous research has shown that studies funded by industry tend to have outcomes favouring sponsors (30), and that conference abstracts are more likely to report interim analyses than full papers (31), sources of funding and the trial status are also essential for assessments of trials.”
MethodHolloway, R. G. (2005) · Neurology · doi:10.1212/wnl.64.1.172 · Cited by 31
Duloxetine versus other anti-depressive agents for depression
Nosè, M., Cipriani, A., Furukawa, T. A., Omori, I. M., Churchill, R. C., McGuire, H., & Barbui, C. (2007) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd006533 · Cited by 32
Skin patch and vaginal ring versus combined oral contraceptives for contraception
Lopez, L. M., Grimes, D. A., Gallo, M. F., & Schulz, K. F. (2010) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd003552.pub3 · Cited by 31
Botulinum Toxin Type A Immunogenicity across Multiple Indications: An Overview Systematic Review
Rahman, E., Banerjee, P. S., Asghar, A., Gupta, N. K., & Mosahebi, A. (2022) · Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery · doi:10.1097/prs.0000000000008904 · Cited by 30
Tharyan, P., George, A. T., Kirubakaran, R., & Barnabas, J. P. (2012) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2011.11.011 · Cited by 30
Amending and defending Critical Contextual Empiricism
Borgerson, K. (2011) · European Journal for Philosophy of Science · doi:10.1007/s13194-011-0035-5 · Cited by 31
Da produção à avaliação de tecnologias dos sistemas de saúde: desafios do século XXI
Novaes, H. M. D. (2006) · Revista de Saúde Pública · doi:10.1590/s0034-89102006000400018 · Cited by 29
Academia–Industry Partnerships: Are we ready for new models of partnership?
Lacombe, D., Burock, S., & Meunier, F. (2012) · European Journal of Cancer · doi:10.1016/j.ejca.2012.09.027 · Cited by 30
Evidence‐Based Medicine and the Challenge of Low Back Pain: Where Are We Now?
Chou, R. (2005) · Pain Practice · doi:10.1111/j.1533-2500.2005.05302.x · Cited by 30
Corporate Disguises in Medical Science
Sismondo, S. (2011) · Bulletin of Science Technology & Society · doi:10.1177/0270467611422838 · Cited by 30
HEE-GER: a systematic review of German economic evaluations of health care published 1990–2004
Schwappach, D. L. B., & Boluarte, T. A. (2007) · BMC Health Services Research · doi:10.1186/1472-6963-7-7 · Cited by 30
Villar, J., Pérez‐Méndez, L., Aguirre‐Jaime, A., & Kacmarek, R. M. (2004) · Intensive Care Medicine · doi:10.1007/s00134-004-2519-7 · Cited by 27
“However, it is naive to believe that the interests of industry will align with broader societal interests in securing effective and affordable care [37].”
Chou, R., Fu, R. F., Carson, S., Saha, S., & Helfand, M. (2006) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2006.02.021 · Cited by 30
Clinical Trial Investigators and Their Prescribing Patterns
Psaty, B. M., & Rennie, D. (2006) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.295.23.2787 · Cited by 30
Oral contraceptives containing drospirenone for premenstrual syndrome
Lopez, L. M., Kaptein, A. A., & Helmerhorst, F. M. (2009) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd006586.pub3 · Cited by 30
Steel, D. P. (2018) · Kennedy Institute of Ethics journal · doi:10.1353/ken.2018.0011 · Cited by 29
Bouaddi, O., Zbiri, S., & Belrhiti, Z. (2023) · BMJ Global Health · doi:10.1136/bmjgh-2023-011981 · Cited by 35
Barnes, R., Hammond, S. K., & Glantz, S. A. (2006) · Environmental Health Perspectives · doi:10.1289/ehp.9385 · Cited by 29
“Study. Although the results of industry-funded research consistently reflect a bias in support of the sponsors’ interests (Bekelman et al. 2003; Bero 2005a; Bero and Rennie 1996; Bhandari et al. 2004; Boyd and Bero 2000; Boyd et al. 2003; Cho and Bero 1996; Glaser and Bero 2005; Levine et al. 2003; Lexchin et al. 2003…”
BackgroundResultdos Santos, M. B. F., Agostini, B. A., Moraes, R. R., Schwendicke, F., & Sarkis‐Onofre, R. (2019) · Journal Of Clinical Periodontology · doi:10.1111/jcpe.13100 · Cited by 29
Climate skeptics’ identity construction and (Dis)trust in science in the United States
Sarathchandra, D., Haltinner, K., & Grindal, M. (2021) · Environmental Sociology · doi:10.1080/23251042.2021.1970436 · Cited by 27
Stoniute, A., Madhuvrata, P., Still, M., Barron‐Millar, E., Nabi, G., & Omar, M. I. (2023) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd003781.pub3 · Cited by 29
Financial and intellectual conflicts of interest: confusion and clarity
Bion, J. (2009) · Current Opinion in Critical Care · doi:10.1097/mcc.0b013e328332f53a · Cited by 29
Relationship Between Declared Funding Support and Level of Evidence
Noordin, S., Wright, J. G., & Howard, A. (2010) · Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery · doi:10.2106/jbjs.i.00224 · Cited by 29
Flaherty, D. K. (2013) · Annals of Pharmacotherapy · doi:10.1345/aph.1r691 · Cited by 29
Does Industry Sponsorship Undermine the Integrity of Nutrition Research?
Katan, M. (2006) · PLoS Medicine · doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.0040006 · Cited by 31
The ethics of psychopharmacological research in legal minors
Tan, J. O. A., & Kölch, M. G. (2008) · Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Mental Health · doi:10.1186/1753-2000-2-39 · Cited by 29
Independent clinical research in Europe.
Remuzzi, G., Schieppati, A., Boissel, J., Garattini, S., & Horton, R. (2004) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(04)17360-1 · Cited by 28
„Health Technology Assessment“
Wild, C. (2006) · Der Anaesthesist · doi:10.1007/s00101-006-0999-2 · Cited by 6
Strengthening the Theory of Institutional Corruptions: Broadening, Clarifying, and MeasuringPreprint
Light, D. W. (2013) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.2236391 · Cited by 34
Interpretation of the Expected Value of Perfect Information and Research Recommendations
Thorn, J. C., Coast, J., & Andronis, L. (2015) · Medical Decision Making · doi:10.1177/0272989x15586552 · Cited by 28
“Funding by industry sponsors is associated with the presentation of more positive cost-effectiveness results, a form of publication bias.(32) This study suggests that industry sponsors may be more likely than government sponsors to make positive recommendations based on their VOI results, which may tally well with com…”
BackgroundAneja, A., Esquitin, R., Shah, K., Iyengar, R. L., Nisenbaum, R. A., de Melo, M. N., Mathewkutty, S., Sethi, S. S., Mamdani, M., & Farkouh, M. E. (2013) · Journal of the American College of Cardiology · doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2012.10.056 · Cited by 28
Funding source and the quality of reports of chronic wounds trials: 2004 to 2011
Hodgson, R. M., Allen, R. J., Broderick, E., Bland, M., Dumville, J. C., Ashby, R. L., Bell-Syer, S. E., Foxlee, R., Hall, J., Lamb, K. V., et al. (2014) · Trials · doi:10.1186/1745-6215-15-19 · Cited by 28
“For example, studies have observed that industry-funded drug trials are more likely to report in favour of (the sponsored) treatment when compared with research not funded by a commercial organisation [21-24].”
ResultExploring the Asymmetrical Relationship Between the Power of Finance Bias and Evidence
Howick, J. (2019) · Perspectives in biology and medicine · doi:10.1353/pbm.2019.0009 · Cited by 30
Effect of revealing authors’ conflicts of interests in peer review: randomized controlled trial
John, L. K., Loewenstein, G. F., Marder, A., & Callaham, M. L. (2019) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.l5896 · Cited by 28
Metadata
- Authors
- Lexchin, J., Bero, L. A., Djulbegovic, B., & Clark, O.
- Affiliations
- York University (CA)
- University of California, San Francisco (US)
- Corresponding author
- Lexchin, Joel
- Venue
- BMJ
- Publisher
- BMJ
- Published
- 2003-05-29
- Volume
- 326
- Issue
- 7400
- Pages
- 1167-1170
- ISSN
- 0007-1447 (ISSN-L)
- 0959-8138
- 1468-5833
- PMC
- PMC156458
- OpenAlex
- W2136284733
- Cited by
- 2,147
- References
- 81
- Citations by year
- 2026: 34 · 2025: 49 · 2024: 61 · 2023: 56 · 2022: 57 · 2021: 53 · 2020: 89 · 2019: 74 · 2018: 86 · 2017: 84 · 2016: 82 · 2015: 100 · 2014: 114 · 2013: 107 · 2012: 150
- FWCI
- 10.13
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Licence
- www.bmj.com/company/legal-information/terms-conditions/legal-information/tdm-licencepolicy (tdm)
- Locations
- BMJ (publishedVersion)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
- DigitalGeorgetown (Georgetown University Library) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Nursing › Issues, ethics and legal aspects › Pharmaceutical industry and healthcare
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Global Public Health Policies and Epidemiology
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Pharmaceutical Economics and Policy
- Keywords
- pharmaceutical industry sponsorship, research bias, publication bias, trial quality, research funding sources, comparator selection, conflicts of interest
- MeSH terms
- Clinical Trials as Topic, Drug Industry, Financing, Organized, Publishing, Research, Research Support as Topic
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
