This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Related article  • Similar articles in JAMA

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

To the Editor: In their discussion of THE JOURNAL's policy on prepublication release of information,¹ Dr Fontanarosa and Ms Flanagin² used an inappropriate example to defend a flawed policy that attempts to squelch public discussion of medical research.

Restrictions on the prepublication dissemination of research results are invoked in the name of good patient care, yet the THE JOURNAL's policy fosters an environment in which sketchy research abstracts presented at scientific meetings may be widely disseminated by the news media, while more thorough discussion that could improve the quality and accuracy of such journalism is harshly discouraged. Indeed, almost every health or medical journalist can recount cases of researchers too terrified to share even basic clarifications or explanations of their work with reporters, for fear that their papers would be banished from consideration by THE JOURNAL, resulting in serious harm to their reputations and careers.

Certainly there are important differences . . . [Full Text of this Article]

RELATED ARTICLE

THE JOURNAL's Policy Regarding Release of Information to the Public
Phil B. Fontanarosa, Annette Flanagin, and Catherine D. DeAngelis
JAMA. 2000;284(22):2929-2931.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Media Coverage of Scientific Meetings: Too Much, Too Soon?
Schwartz et al.
JAMA 2002;287:2859-2863.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT