A comparison of journal instructions regarding institutional review board approval and conflict-of-interest disclosure between 1995 and 2005
Abstract
Objectives To compare 2005 and 1995 ethics guidelines from journal editors to authors regarding requirements for institutional review board (IRB) approval and conflict-of-interest (COI) disclosure. Design A descriptive study of the ethics guidelines published in 103 English-language biomedical journals listed in the Abridged Index Medicus in 1995 and 2005. Each journal was reviewed by the principal author and one of four independent reviewers. Results During the period, the proportion of journals requiring IRB approval increased from 42% (95% CI 32.2% to 51.2%, p Conclusions Instructions to authors regarding ethical standards have improved. Some remain incomplete, especially regarding the scope of disclosure of COI. The ethical guidelines presented to authors need further clarification and standardisation.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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 revised guidelines are in line with many journals' policies and will assist authors in complying with information requirements on the ethical review of the research, data presentation and access, statistical methods, and conflicts of interest.
“The revised guidelines are also in line with many journals’ policies and will assist authors in complying with information requirements on the ethical review of the research [48, 49], data presentation and access [50–52], statistical methods [51, 52], and conflicts of interest [53, 54].”
From The ARRIVE guidelines 2.0: Updated guidelines for reporting animal research (2020) · cites this paper as [53]
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 19
- 10.1001/jama.284.23.3043 · DOI · Paper page
- International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. Uniform requirements for manuscripts submitted to biomedical journals. Philadelphia: ICMJE, 2007. http://www.icmje.org/ (accessed 2 October 2008).
- 10.1001/jama.1997.03540350059034 · DOI
- 10.1001/jama.1997.03540350072037 · DOI
- 10.1001/jama.287.21.2835 · DOI
- Atlas, 2003, Emerging ethical issues in instructions to authors of high impact biomedical journals., J Med Libr Assoc, 91, 442
- 10.1001/archopht.123.5.684 · DOI
- 10.1001/jama.294.1.110 · DOI
- 10.1016/S1047-2797(98)00045-3 · DOI
- 10.1097/00003246-199809000-00035 · DOI
- 10.1097/00000542-200311000-00030 · DOI
- 10.1016/0300-9572(95)00928-0 · DOI
- 10.1542/peds.110.2.364 · DOI
- 10.1001/jama.296.8.jed60051 · DOI
- 10.1001/jama.286.1.89 · DOI
- Journal Citation Reports Science Edition 2005. Journal impact factor. http://portal.isiknowledge.com/portal.cgi?DestApp = JCR&Func = Frame (accessed 2 October 2008).
- 10.1001/jama.1996.03540080059030 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1001/jama.1997.03540350077040 · DOI
- 10.1001/jama.293.23.jed50037 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The ARRIVE guidelines 2.0: Updated guidelines for reporting animal research
Percie du Sert, N., Hurst, V., Ahluwalia, A., Alam, S., Avey, M. T., Baker, M., Browne, W. J., Clark, A., Cuthill, I. C., Dirnagl, U., et al. (2020) · PLOS Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.3000410 · Cited by 5,939 · see citing works
Systematic review and meta-analyses of studies analysing instructions to authors from 1987 to 2017.
Malički, M., Jerončić, A., Aalbersberg, I. J., Bouter, L., & ter Riet, G. (2021) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-021-26027-y · Cited by 53 · see citing works
- Authors
- Rowan-Legg, A., Weijer, C., Gao, J., & Fernandez, C.
- Affiliations
- Izaak Walton Killam Health Centre (CA)
- Western University (CA)
- Cancer Care Nova Scotia (CA)
- Dalhousie University (CA)
- Corresponding author
- Rowan-Legg, A
- Venue
- Journal of Medical Ethics
- Publisher
- BMJ
- Published
- 2008-12-22
- Volume
- 35
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 74-78
- ISSN
- 0306-6800 (ISSN-L)
- 1473-4257
- OpenAlex
- W2159759625
- Cited by
- 64
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 12 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 5
- FWCI
- 6.07
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Medical Ethics (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Scholarship@Western (Western University) (submittedVersion)
- DigitalGeorgetown (Georgetown University Library) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Nursing › Issues, ethics and legal aspects › Pharmaceutical industry and healthcare
- Social Sciences › Education › Academic integrity and plagiarism
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Ethics in Clinical Research
- Keywords
- institutional review board approval, conflict of interest disclosure, author guidelines, research ethics, Declaration of Helsinki, authorship criteria, journal impact factor, biomedical journals
- MeSH terms
- Humans, Conflict of Interest, Practice Guidelines as Topic, Ethical Review, Disclosure, Editorial Policies, Biomedical Research
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
