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 ISI (3)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Topic Collections  • Journalology/ Peer Review/ Authorship  • Conflict of Interest  • Alert me on articles by topic

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

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