- Stephen Ginn
- 1BMJ
International guidelines for medical journals are too lax and enable drug companies to conceal their contributions to scientific papers, says a personal view published in PLoS Medicine (doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1001072).
Alastair Matheson, who has worked as a consultant and freelance writer for the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries for more than 15 years, says that the guidelines of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors need to be “fundamentally revised,” because they fail to differentiate clearly between authors and contributors.
The guidelines identify authors as those who have contributed to the preparation of a study at three stages, the third of which is the final sign-off. As long as researchers make some …
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