 |
 |

Results of Clinical Trials Sponsored by For-Profit vs Nonprofit Entities
 |
 |
| 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: Dr Als-Nielsen and colleagues1 found that trials funded by for-profit organizations favored the active drug more commonly than placebo. The authors concluded that this may have been due to biased interpretation of trial results. However, an association between funding and study conclusions is not surprising.
A major reason for this, which the authors alluded to briefly, is the "violation of the uncertainty principle," an unfortunate phrase, as it implies error or some nefarious or underhanded activity. There really is no reason to expect that "half of all [published] trials should favor the control intervention." While equipoise may be present in at least some trials sponsored by nonprofit organizations, it is unrealistic to think that there is anything like equipoise in studies sponsored by industry. It is not the business of pharmaceutical companies to do such studies; they are in the business of confirming efficacy. No pharmaceutical company . . . [Full Text of this Article]
Robert H. Palmer, MD
Forest Research Institute Jersey City, NJ
CiteULike Connotea Del.icio.us Digg Reddit Technorati Twitter
What's this?
RELATED ARTICLES
Results of Clinical Trials Sponsored by For-Profit vs Nonprofit Entities
Jonathan B. Rosefsky
JAMA. 2003;290(23):3070-3071.
EXTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Results of Clinical Trials Sponsored by For-Profit vs Nonprofit Entities
Stig Waldorff
JAMA. 2003;290(23):3071.
EXTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Results of Clinical Trials Sponsored by For-Profit vs Nonprofit EntitiesReply
Bodil Als-Nielsen, Wendong Chen, Christian Gluud, and Lise Lotte Kjaergard
JAMA. 2003;290(23):3071-3072.
EXTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Association of Funding and Conclusions in Randomized Drug Trials: A Reflection of Treatment Effect or Adverse Events?
Bodil Als-Nielsen, Wendong Chen, Christian Gluud, and Lise L. Kjaergard
JAMA. 2003;290(7):921-928.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
|