The intersections of industry with the health research enterprise

Akl, Elie A.; Khamis, Assem M.

doi:10.1186/s12961-019-0457-7

Cited by 9 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 45 publications

(60 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Because position statements come from BIHW, not Coca-Cola itself, they appear to be issued by a legitimate unbiased source of scientific information” [ 44 ]. Trusted individuals including scientists, health professionals, and police officers are also used to disseminate industry-friendly scientific messages, such as the alcohol industry funding dieticians to promote the health benefits of beer [ 29 ]. As part of British American Tobacco’s efforts to secure policy reforms in the EU that would shape the use of science in policy decision-making in industry’s favour, it created a broad coalition of corporations including from the pharmaceutical, chemicals, and fossil fuels industries–a “policy network” through which to claim widely held support for the reforms [ 21 ].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The particular strengths of our analysis over existing attempts to synthesise the evidence in this area are three-fold. First, it identifies industry sectors inductively, leading to the inclusion of several sectors that thus far had either been excluded from (the gambling industry) [ 27 , 28 , 63 ] or relatively neglected in (the alcohol [ 2 , 27 , 63 ], extractive [ 27 , 29 ], food and drink [ 2 , 27 , 63 ] and fossil fuels [ 28 , 29 , 63 ] industries) this work. Second, it extends previous syntheses that focused on corporate influence on science by also examining the ways in which corporations have attempted to influence the use of science in policymaking.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To date, overviews of the literature that investigate multiple industries have offered rich narrative syntheses of industries’ scientific strategies [ 1 , 2 , 27 ]; synthesised literature on discrete parts of this influence on science, such as on research agendas [ 28 ]; and mapped relationships through which health research may be affected by corporate interests [ 29 ]. However, no scholarly work has systematically categorised industry strategies to give a comprehensive yet detailed picture of the entire phenomenon.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The Science for Profit Model—How and why corporations influence science and the use of science in policy and practice

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Science has been at the centre of attempts by major industries, including tobacco, chemical, and pharmaceutical, to delay progress in tackling threats to human and planetary health by, inter alia, obscuring industry harms, and opposing regulation. Some aspects of this influence are well documented, others remain poorly understood, and similarities between industries remain underexplored. This study, therefore, aims to synthesise the literature to develop an evidence-based typology and model of corporate influence on science in order to provide an overview of this multi-faceted phenomenon. We obtained literature examining corporate attempts to influence science and the use of science in policy and practice from: database searches, bibliographies, expert recommendations, and web alerts; using a modified scoping review methodology (n = 68). Through interpretive analysis we developed the Science for Profit Typology and Model. We identified eight corporate sectors repeatedly engaging in activities to influence science, including: manipulation of scientific methods; reshaping of criteria for establishing scientific “proof”; threats against scientists; and clandestine promotion of policy reforms that increase reliance on industry evidence. The typology identifies five macro-level strategies used consistently across the eight industries, comprising 19 meso-level strategies. The model shows how these strategies work to maximise the volume, credibility, reach, and use of industry-favourable science, while minimising these same aspects of industry-unfavourable science. This creates doubt about harms of industry products/practices or efficacy of policies affecting industry; promotes industry-favoured policy responses and industry products as solutions; and legitimises industry’s role as scientific stakeholder. These efforts ultimately serve to weaken policy, prevent litigation, and maximise use of industry products/practices—maximising corporate profitability. We provide an accessible way to understand how and why corporations influence science, demonstrate the need for collective solutions, and discuss changes needed to ensure science works in the public interest.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Science for Profit Model—How and why corporations influence science and the use of science in policy and practice

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These front groups engage in opposing legislations and tax reforms, and scare and disease mongering . Interaction with health consumers was shown to sit within the industry's larger plan to interfere through different means with all health actors, such as funding agencies, experts, professional organizations, regulatory agencies and health practitioners …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…48,49,52 Interaction with health consumers was shown to sit within the industry's larger plan to interfere through different means with all health actors, such as funding agencies, experts, professional organizations, regulatory agencies and health practitioners. 53 Ozieranski et al addressed our review question but based on the analysis of industry money going to organizations. They found that 69% of industry money dedicated to patient organizations covering 30 condition areas went to organizations covering five conditions.…”

Section: Comparison To Similar Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Financial relationships between patient and consumer representatives and the health industry: A systematic review

Khabsa

Semaan

El‐Harakeh

et al. 2019

Health Expectations

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Patients and consumers are increasingly engaged in health policymaking, research and drug regulation. Having financial relationships with the health industry creates situations of conflicts of interest (COI) and might compromise their meaningful and unbiased participation. Objective To synthesize available evidence on the financial relationships between the health industry and patient and consumer representatives and their organizations. Methods We systematically searched MEDLINE and EMBASE. We selected studies and abstracted data in duplicate and independently. We reported on outcomes related to financial relationships of individuals with, and/or funding of organizations by the health industry. Results We identified a total of 14 510 unique citations, of which 24 reports of 23 studies were eligible. Three studies (13%) addressed the financial relationship of patient and consumer representatives with the health industry. Of these, two examined the proportion of public speakers in drug regulatory processes who have financial relationships; the proportions in the two studies were 25% and 19% respectively. Twenty studies (87%) addressed funding of patient and consumer organizations. The median proportion of organizations that reported funding from the health industry was 62% (IQR: 34%‐69%) in questionnaire surveys, and 75% (IQR: 58%‐85%) in surveys of their websites. Among organizations for which there was evidence of industry funding, a median proportion of 29% (IQR: 27%‐44%) acknowledged on their websites receiving that funding. Conclusion Financial relationships between the health industry and patient and consumer representatives and their organizations are common and may not be disclosed. Stricter regulation on disclosure and management is needed.

show abstract

The Policies for the Disclosure of Funding and Conflict of Interest in Surgery Journals: A Cross‐Sectional Survey

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Industry through its funding of research and through its relationships with study authors can influence the results of research. Most journals have policies for reporting funding and disclosing conflict of interest (COI) to mitigate the influence of industry on research. The objective of this study is to assess the policies of surgery journals for the reporting of funding and the disclosure of COI. Methods We described the prevalence and characteristics of funding and COI policies of journals indexed under “Surgery” in the Journal Citation Reports. We extracted data from publicly available information and through simulation of manuscript submission. Results Of the 186 eligible journals, 171 (92%) had policies for reporting of funding. None of the policies described procedures to deal with non‐reporting or underreporting of funding. Of the 186 journals, 183 (99%) had a policy for disclosure of COI. All journals with a COI policy required disclosure of financial interest, while 96 (52%) required the disclosure of non‐financial interests. Only 24 (13%) policies described how non‐disclosure of COI affects the editorial process, and none described procedures to verify COI disclosure. Of the policies that required disclosing COI, 94 (51%) also required reporting the source of financial COI. Conclusions Most journals have policies for reporting of funding and disclosure of financial COI. However, many do not have clear policies for disclosing non‐financial COI. Major limitations in the policies include the lack of processes for the verification of disclosed interests and for dealing with underreporting of funding and of COI.

show abstract

The intersections of industry with the health research enterprise

Cited by 9 publications

References 45 publications

The Science for Profit Model—How and why corporations influence science and the use of science in policy and practice

The Science for Profit Model—How and why corporations influence science and the use of science in policy and practice

Financial relationships between patient and consumer representatives and the health industry: A systematic review

The Policies for the Disclosure of Funding and Conflict of Interest in Surgery Journals: A Cross‐Sectional Survey

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About