Letters Conflicts of interest

The BMJ should extend its transparency protocol in light of example of King’s Fund report on Canterbury, New Zealand

BMJ 2014; 348 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.g3775 (Published 11 June 2014) Cite this as: BMJ 2014;348:g3775
  1. Robin Gauld, professor of health policy1,
  2. Antony Raymont, independent health services researcher2,
  3. Philip F Bagshaw, chair3,
  4. M Gary Nicholls, emeritus professor4,
  5. Christopher M Frampton, associate professor of biostatistics4
  1. 1Centre for Health Systems, Department of Preventive and Social Medicine, University of Otago, PO Box 56, Dunedin 9054, New Zealand
  2. 2Milford, Auckland, New Zealand
  3. 3Canterbury Charity Hospital Trust, PO Box 20409, Christchurch, New Zealand
  4. 4Department of Medicine, PO Box 4345, University of Otago, Christchurch, New Zealand
  1. robin.gauld{at}otago.ac.nz

We read the King’s Fund report on Canterbury, New Zealand, and the related editorial in The BMJ last year with great interest.1 2 We write now because new information has come to light. Worried by what could be perceived as an overly positive report by the King’s Fund on the “impressive progress,” as the editorial described it, made by Canterbury, we …

View Full Text

Log in

Log in through your institution


* For online subscription