Re: Justifying conflicts of interest in medical journals: a very bad idea
There is another "conflict" issue that NEJM left out of their editorials and 3 scenario examples; what about conflicts of interest among peer reviewers?
If NEJM is arguing that review articles by experts should be published regardless of their financial conflicts of interest, are they suggesting that those articles should be evaluated by peer reviewers who have similar financial conflicts of interest?
Some authors have been caught not disclosing their financial conflicts of interest; but since the peer review process is anonymous, there's no way for readers to know how objective the peer review process really was for a given article.
Who chooses peer reviewers at NEJM? Can authors recommend peer reviewers for their articles? Or does the editor or editorial staff select peer reviewers? If the NEJM solicits a review article, does that article get published with or without peer review?
The peer review process has been scammed by authors who make up fictitious reviewer names and identities and email addresses so the authors wind up being their own peer reviewer.
How far is NEJM willing to go with their conflict-of-interest-is-not-a-problem approach?
Competing interests: No competing interests