Bias in research and conflict of interest: why should we care?

Abstract

s and papers presenting data from trials that are controlled and analysed by industry or contractors should not be accepted for presentation or publication in our journals and at our conferences due to the potential for bias, as outlined in recent WAME18 and ICMJE19 guidelines. Drug trials should be funded publicly9. Ghost-writing of research papers or inappropriately claiming authorship for ghost-written papers should be outlawed and be made subject to significant sanctions, e.g. expulsion from scientific societies or public blacklisting of ‘authors’. Meta-analyses and Cochrane reviews ought to be limited to publicly funded trials, with all industrycontrolled data excluded as a matter of course. In order for us to be able to gauge the potential for bias, IUGJ and other journals in our field should require full and detailed disclosure of financial conflict of interest from editors, referees and authors. The discussion surrounding financial conflict of interest is very likely to seriously affect individuals and professional associations. However, there is no way to avoid the issue. We will have to act soon to help restore the badly battered public confidence in clinical research. To quote a recent JAMA Editorial30: “The need for transparency in reporting the financial conflicts of interest of authors and the relationships between investigators and funding sources has never been greater and is essential to help maintain confidence and trust in the scientific integrity of medical research articles.” The simple fact that you’re reading this probably means it’s