Article type
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In order to ensure the reliability and transparency of systematic reviews, it is vital that review authors are free of financial conflicts of interest that may affect their objectivity when evaluating studies and interpretating the review's findings. Cochrane’s Conflict of Interest policy is among the most stringent in the field and stipulates, among other things, that authors may not have received funding or other payments from commercial entities with a financial interest in the topic of the review they are working on. This includes participation in studies where a commercial entity controls the study design or owns the research results.
However, funding is not the only avenue that allows commercial entities to potentially influence research results. As public funding for research becomes scarcer, many institutions, including funding bodies such as the European Commission or the National Science Foundation, actively encourage academia-industry collaboration in research to explore novel knowledge, technologies or procedures. While these collaborations are publicly funded, they often include a range of commercial research partners such as pharmaceutical companies or medical device makers.
OBJECTIVE: The proposed talk will give a number of examples of such studies with industry participation, and raise the question of how publishers’ conflict of interest policies can account for the potential bias they introduce to the research process.
METHODS: Qualitative analysis of research collaboration case studies and funding policies promoting industry participation in research
RESULTS: with increasing pressure on public funding for research as well as growing emphasis on commercial impact of funded studies, companies now often do not act as funders of research but rather, data producers, giving them substantial influence over research results. This kind of influence is not yet sufficiently covered by existing conflict of interest policies in systematic review publishing.
CONCLUSIONS: Systematic review publishers should be aware of the growing importance of academia-industry partnerships in research and its potential impact on findings, and develop appropriate policies.
However, funding is not the only avenue that allows commercial entities to potentially influence research results. As public funding for research becomes scarcer, many institutions, including funding bodies such as the European Commission or the National Science Foundation, actively encourage academia-industry collaboration in research to explore novel knowledge, technologies or procedures. While these collaborations are publicly funded, they often include a range of commercial research partners such as pharmaceutical companies or medical device makers.
OBJECTIVE: The proposed talk will give a number of examples of such studies with industry participation, and raise the question of how publishers’ conflict of interest policies can account for the potential bias they introduce to the research process.
METHODS: Qualitative analysis of research collaboration case studies and funding policies promoting industry participation in research
RESULTS: with increasing pressure on public funding for research as well as growing emphasis on commercial impact of funded studies, companies now often do not act as funders of research but rather, data producers, giving them substantial influence over research results. This kind of influence is not yet sufficiently covered by existing conflict of interest policies in systematic review publishing.
CONCLUSIONS: Systematic review publishers should be aware of the growing importance of academia-industry partnerships in research and its potential impact on findings, and develop appropriate policies.