You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT JAMA
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 294 No. 18, November 9, 2005 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  JAMA
  •  Online Features
  Medical News & Perspectives
 This Article
 •Full text
 •PDF
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citing articles on HighWire
 •Citing articles on Web of Science (3)
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Similar articles in JAMA
 Topic Collections
 •Journalology/ Peer Review/ Authorship
 •Medical Practice
 •Conflict of Interest
 •Alert me on articles by topic
 Social Bookmarking
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Add to Digg Add to Reddit Add to Technorati Add to Twitter What's this?

Biomedical Journals Probe Peer Review

Tracy Hampton, PhD

JAMA. 2005;294:2287-2288.

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

Chicago—A string of controversies in recent years over pharmaceutical companies withholding information about drug risks and researchers failing to disclose financial ties with drug companies has shaken the confidence of clinicians and patients alike. Last year, officials questioned whether data indicating that certain drugs (such as Merck & Co’s pain relief drug rofecoxib and GlaxoSmithKline’s paroxetine, an antidepressant) pose risks for patients were known by the companies but not reported, events that highlighted the need for greater transparency in drug trials.

Such incidents have reinforced the conviction of journal editors that they have an important role to play in exposing potential conflicts of interest, bias, and misconduct. This conviction, in fact, has helped fuel the relatively young field of the study of the peer review process itself.


Through the peer review process, journal editors are challenged with exposing potential conflicts of interest, bias, and misconduct of . . . [Full Text of this Article]

PUBLISHING DRUG TRIALS



Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter     What's this?

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Translating Epoetin Research Into Practice: The Role Of Government And The Use Of Scientific Evidence
Cotter et al.
Health Aff (Millwood) 2006;25:1249-1259.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 2005 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.