- Jeanne Lenzer
- New York
Fierce opposition to industry funding of Cochrane reviews has caused the organisation's leadership to draft a set of proposals that will, if accepted, further restrict commercial funding. The proposed policy will forbid for-profit companies to fund a Cochrane review if they have a “real or potential vested interest in the findings of the review.” It would additionally forbid commercial entities to fund the review groups themselves.
The new proposals do not forbid industry sponsorship of other Cochrane entities, but suggest creating a “firewall” between commercial sources and review groups. Nor do they restrict funding by not—for—profit organisations. This is worrying some researchers as a “third party” strategy—in which industry funds or even creates not—for—profit professional or lay organisations that promote certain medicines—is increasingly being used by drug companies …
Sign in
Article access
Article access for 1 day
Purchase this article for £20 $30 €32*
The PDF version can be downloaded as your personal record







CiteULike
Connotea
Del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Mendeley
Reddit
Technorati
Twitter
Stumbleupon
Rapid responses
Latest Responses
Re: Ventilator associated pneumonia
Published 30 May 2012
Re: Restless legs syndrome
Published 30 May 2012
Author's reply
Published 30 May 2012
Re: Full access to trial data holds many benefits and a few pitfalls, conference hears
Published 30 May 2012
Restless Legs Syndrome: Fact or Fiction
Published 30 May 2012
Most responses
Venous thrombosis in users of non-oral hormonal contraception: follow-up study, Denmark 2001-10 (12 responses)
Published 10 May 2012 - 23:32
The psychiatric oligarchs who medicalise normality (9 responses)
Published 2 May 2012 - 15:42
Are doctors justified in taking industrial action in defence of their pensions? No (8 responses)
Published 8 May 2012 - 12:21
Are doctors justified in taking industrial action in defence of their pensions? Yes (8 responses)
Published 8 May 2012 - 12:21
The hardest thing: admitting error (7 responses)
Published 2 May 2012 - 12:27