What Do Medical Researchers and Legislators Have in Common? Conflict of Interest, for One
By Shawn Kennedy, MA, RN, AJN interim editor-in-chief
In a not-so-old blog post I did last month, I reported on a conference I attended in Vancouver. There, editors from JAMA presented a study revealing that ghostwriting was a major problem for the leading medical journals. Articles were being drafted by writers other than the researchers. In some cases, the writers didn’t have access to all the data, which meant that analyses, conclusions, and—in some cases—recommendations for treatment were based on incomplete or misinterpreted findings. As described in a New York Times article on the issue, medical product and pharmaceutical companies have much to gain if the safety and efficacy of their products are reported in a positive light.
Conflict of interest is a major concern whenever someone who stands to personally benefit can influence a decision. The National Institutes of Health, which is the leading medical and health research agency in this country, has imposed strict rules for employees limiting consulting and speaking fees involving outside companies and institutions that may have a stake in research outcomes. Most government agencies, research or not, impose rules to avoid conflicts of interest.
Last week, NBC News reported that protestors staged a sit-in at the Hartford, Connecticut, offices of Senator Joe Lieberman, demanding that he stop taking campaign contributions from insurance companies.