Rapid Responses to:

EDUCATION AND DEBATE: R S Taylor, M F Drummond, G Salkeld, and S D Sullivan Inclusion of cost effectiveness in licensing requirements of new drugs: the fourth hurdle BMJ 2004; 329: 972-975 [Full text]

Rapid Responses: Submit a response to this article

Rapid Responses published:

Transparency & Trust

Nick Freemantle, Suzanne Hill   (22 October 2004)

Transparency & Trust 22 October 2004
Nick Freemantle, Professor of clinical epidemiology & biostatistics University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham B15 2TT, Suzanne Hill Send response to journal: Re: Transparency & Trust	Kamran Abbasi is probably correct to suggest that less than half of the articles on pharmaceuticals published in this weeks BMJ are ghost written by the wicked pharmaceutical industry,[1] but this should not be a source of complacency. Indeed, this issue of the BMJ does contain one glaring error concerning transparency (although probably not trust). The article by Taylor et al [2] is an edited version of a chapter in a book published by BMJ books[3] and was commissioned by the Journal on that basis, although this is not made clear anywhere in the article or accompanying text. 1. Abbasi K. Editors Choice, BMJ 2004; 329 (23 October), doi:10.1136/bmj.329.7472.0-g 2. Taylor RS, Drummond MF, Salkeld G, Sullivan SD. Inclusion of cost effectiveness in licensing requirements of new drugs: the fourth hurdle. BMJ 2004;329:972-975 3. Freemantle N, Hill S (Eds). Evaluating pharmaceuticals for health policy and reimbursement. London, BMJ Books, 2004. Competing interests: None declared