 |
|
Handling Conflicts of Interest Between Industry and Academia
|
|
| 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 institutional conflicts of interest, Dr Johns and colleagues1 observed that "trustees, presidents, chancellors, provosts, deans, [and] department chairpersons also have developed extensive financial ties with industry." They concluded that these conflicts "should be managed rather than eliminated." The authors, however, never discussed the central issue—how to manage this imbalanced relationship in which industry has considerably more resources and markedly different priorities than medical schools. Angell2 has asserted that "For-profit businesses are pledged to increase the value of their investors' stock. That is a very different goal from the mission of medical schools . . . academic medical centers should be wary of partnerships in which they make available their precious resources . . . to carry out research that serves primarily the interests of the companies. That is ultimately a Faustian bargain."
The source of research funding often determines what research questions get . . . [Full Text of this Article]
RELATED ARTICLES
Handling Conflicts of Interest Between Industry and Academia—Reply
Mark Barnes, Patrik S. Florencio, and Michael M. E. Johns
JAMA. 2003;289(24):3240-3241.
EXTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Restoring Balance to Industry-Academia Relationships in an Era of Institutional Financial Conflicts of Interest: Promoting Research While Maintaining Trust
Michael M. E. Johns, Mark Barnes, and Patrik S. Florencio
JAMA. 2003;289(6):741-746.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
|
