Reporting potential bias

Abstract

As keepers of the journal, we continuously seek to optimize its quality and integrity. In this editorial, we update you on our evolving policies about the disclosure items we require from authors as well as the statements we publish within an article to address potential bias: author contributions, financial and relationship disclosures, and copyright transfers. As our policies on transparency evolve, we seek new ways to increase the quality of the information provided by authors. We are guided by the assumption that in matters regarding scientific integrity, there can be no compromise in our standards of veracity. Every article we publish should be free of bias, spin, and secondary gain. Many facets of medicine have been monetized. Not all threats to objectivity, however, come from commercial interests, because ownership of ideas and self-promotion are also important sources of bias in scientific work. However, commercial conflicts have become the major surrogate for bias—the forces of marketing and sales, as well as the promise of lucrative reward that could wreak havoc on the objectivity of scientific publication. We are not singling out authors' relationships with pharmaceutical or device manufacturers; we also refer to circumstances in which an author holds a patent or performs a diagnostic or therapeutic intervention that is well-compensated, or in which the content of the article being considered could influence the monetary value of some piece of medical knowledge. We have no reservations about author relationships with industry. Many authors are inventors, hold patents, perform innovative diagnostic or therapeutic interventions, or engage in other entrepreneurial activities that seek to improve the health of patients. We simply ask that our authors disclose all of these relationships. Our goal is to provide a comprehensive list of the authors' relationships that may affect their views of efficacy or utility of the results …