Ghostwriting: the importance of definition and its place in contemporary drug marketing

Matheson, Alastair

doi:10.1136/bmj.i4578

Cited by 25 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A Cochrane review shows that industry funded clinical research is more likely to deliver publications that are in favour of the funder’s product 43. The literature is skewed towards favourable results in several ways, including deliberate suppression of unfavourable results 314344…”

Section: New Tactics For Drug Promotionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ethical drug marketing criteria for the 21st century

Parker

Williams

Bero

2018

BMJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: New Tactics For Drug Promotionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ethical drug marketing criteria for the 21st century

Parker

Williams

Bero

2018

BMJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The most visible form of bias in this literature is attributional bias , wherein the role of the academic participants in the study is highlighted and industry’s downplayed [28, 30, 31]. This ensures industry work is presented to readers under the lead authorship of credible academics, and by reducing the impression of commercial influence, may also increase the prospect of journal publication [32].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Marketing trials, marketing tricks — how to spot them and how to stop them

Matheson¹

2017

Trials

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundLast this year in this journal, Barbour and colleagues reported a study of “marketing trials” in leading medical journals (Trials 2016;17:31). In this commentary I discuss their research, describe new analyses of the study cohort and consider measures to address marketing within academic medical literature.DiscussionBarbour et al. sought to identify a subgroup of “marketing trials” within leading medical journals, but in reality, nearly all industry-financed trials serve marketing functions, and many exhibit marketing-related features, including biases, in their framing, methodology or reporting. I conducted new analyses of the cohort of Barbour et al., showing that most trials funded exclusively by drug manufacturers had direct involvement of the manufacturer in design, analysis and reporting, and features supportive of product seeding. However, these commercial enterprises were without exception presented to journal readers as academic-led projects, using attributional spin, which should itself be considered an important form of marketing bias. Barbour et al. correctly conclude that commercial bias in industry clinical trials articles often requires expertise to recognize, and in many cases cannot be identified from the published journal report. Several potential remedies are discussed, including independent clinical research, data sharing, improved reporting guidance, improved tools for assessing research quality, reforms to article attribution, submission checklists and new editorial standards.ConclusionMedicine’s journals have a responsibility to uphold rigorous scientific and reporting standards, require ready trials data access and ensure the commercial dimensions of research are brought prominently to their readers’ attention. Failure to meet these responsibilities constitutes an enduring threat to the integrity of biomedical literature.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13063-017-1827-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

show abstract

“…It is vital to know who interprets the relevance of clinical data for publication. Improper authorship practices, such as ghostwriting and guest authorship, obscure the identities of those who contribute to the published literature, raising questions not only about the validity of the publications, but also about trial conduct and data integrity more generally . Thus, even well‐conducted research can be harmed by any appearance of authorship impropriety.…”

Section: Transparency As a Driver For Ethical Publication Practicementioning

confidence: 99%

Publication ethics from the ground up

DeTora

Foster²,

Nori

et al. 2018

Int J Clin Pract

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SummaryIt is relatively easy to begin policy documents with a general assertion that ethics will be followed. Less obvious is how to ensure that day‐to‐day activities are consonant with ethical standards. We suggest that using day‐to‐day publication activities as the driver for building policies and procedures can promote ethical practices from the ground up. Although basic principles of ethical publication practice may seem straightforward to some, for others this information may require explanation, interpretation and context. Effective policy development includes big‐picture items as well as more day‐to‐day tactical responsibilities such as those discussed below. Research questions, disciplinary practices, applications and team structures may vary. Thus, no single publication plan or policy solution is right for all teams. It is up to team members to review guidelines for best practices and find the optimal implementation for their situations. Experts in publication management, planning and writing can help large teams manage publication activities. These experts have an obligation to maintain and enhance their skills continually. A strong acumen in publication best practices will allow these publication professionals to better address any possible ethical dilemmas in the future.

show abstract

Ghostwriting: the importance of definition and its place in contemporary drug marketing

Abstract: Alastair Matheson describes how the pharmaceutical publications industry seeks to legitimise ghostwriting by changing its definition while deflecting attention from wider marketing practices in academic publishing

Cited by 25 publications

References 39 publications

Ethical drug marketing criteria for the 21st century

Ethical drug marketing criteria for the 21st century

Marketing trials, marketing tricks — how to spot them and how to stop them

Publication ethics from the ground up

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About