An Unbiased Scientific Record Should Be Everyones Agenda 英文参考文献.docVIP

Editorial An Unbiased Scientific Record Should Be Everyone’s Agenda The PLoS Medicine Editors A large and growing literature details the many ways by which research and the subsequent 1. Recognize and Declare Editorial Interests Journals generally have policies regarding declaration of competing interests by authors. Similarly, editors’ political and scientific views, personal relationships, and professional and financial interests can all conceivably interfere with the objectivity of their decisions. therefore have no exclusive reprint trade, and are protected from the inherent bias towards industry-funded pharmaceutical trials that might otherwise operate. published record can be inappropriately influenced, including publication bias [1], outcome reporting bias [2], financial [3] and non-financial [4] competing interests, sponsors’ control of study data and publication [5], and restrictions on access to data and materials [6]. But it can be difficult for an editor, reading a submitted manuscript, to disentangle these many influences and to understand whether the work ultimately represents valid science. Any journal has stories to tell of attempts to unduly influence the publication process—such as the author who repeatedly appeals a manuscript’s rejection, claiming the reviewers are incompetent and demanding evaluation by a specific list of preferred experts, or the biotech company that refuses to publicly deposit the microarray data underlying their findings. Sometimes distortion of the scientific record may be limited in scope, relating to just one paper. But when a single company funds virtually an entire research agenda on a particular topic, there is the potential for wider and far more damaging distortion. In a detailed analysis of documentation released as part of a class-action lawsuit relating to the drug gabapentin (Neurontin), Kay Dickersin has described “…a remarkable assemblage of evidence of reporting bi